Forum Replies Created
27th October 2014, 8:06 at 8:06 am #280376
Let’s look at the drivers. We know that drivers like Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Rosberg makes tens of millions per year as other top athletes in other sports do. But what about drivers like Hulkenberg, Perez, Bottas, Bianchi, Sutil? Are they fairly compensated?
Let’s look at the constructors. I’d be very surprised if teams like Sauber (in the past) or Force India are turning a reasonable profit on the investment. Even if they make 5-10 million (pounds/euros/dollars) profit, it’s still a paltry return on the hundreds of millions that must have been invested and those profits are usually offset by losses in seasons just like Sauber will be facing this year. Ferrari might turn an acceptable profit in F1 but that’s also questionable given that they have to invest more heavily to compete at the top. I suspect McLaren was able to be profitable through their Vodafone deal and other deals in the past.
This is further evidenced by the fact that teams drop out after a few seasons obviously since they don’t receive enough money to compete from F1 even as the last team. They run out of money 2/3s into the season.
Engine manufacturers must look to break even. They are in it for the glory and for the technical expertise that they can use in their cars or hypercars.
Then we have the race promoters and I’ve never read an article where race promoters claimed to have made like a bandit in hosting a F1 race. The circuits are incredibly expensive and I’m sure for every penny they make they pay as much to Bernie.
We all know Bernie and CVC must make crazy money and that has to be the case because no one else seems to make any money.
Does anyone know what other agencies there are? What does the FIA make?
This sport is beyond expensive in terms of attending a race and in terms of watching it which begs the question of why on earth aren’t most participants turning a healthy profit in the sport? That is what needs to change in F1 more so than the regulations.6th October 2014, 21:43 at 9:43 pm #277352
Best wishes to Jules and his family! I’m glad no one else was hurt – I read his helmet had no damage which is just a miracle looking at this video.
If he can survive this and have a normal life, that will be equivalent to winning all the WDCs in the world. Coming back to F1 is a distant 3rd. I hope he can recover!12th July 2014, 15:19 at 3:19 pm #266447
@Kingshark Thanks for sharing the link – I totally missed it.
Does anyone know what the performance penalty is for tying tins and cans to a F1 car? :-)23rd June 2014, 20:41 at 8:41 pm #264285
No predictions but I think Spain should have played Villa, Torres and Mata, the original winning team.23rd June 2014, 20:34 at 8:34 pm #264284
I think Bottas has shown that he has great potential but I don’t see Mercedes replacing Nico with Bottas yet. Just kidding:)14th May 2014, 6:24 at 6:24 am #260325
@fastiesty – so what you’re saying if I understand it correctly is that Lewis is driving more slowly in order to be quicker in terms of time. He does that by having less fuel and by braking later.
That’s fascinating – are there any links to articles talking about that?13th May 2014, 14:28 at 2:28 pm #260226
If 1KG = 0.1 seconds per lap well that means that Lewis had a 0.3 second handicap at the end of the race just from extra fuel.
I still don’t understand why he had more fuel – he started from pole so you’d expect him to start with no more fuel than Nico. Both cars were expected to not be fighting for position much.
I’m surprised no one has provided a theory yet on the F1Fanatic forum. Obviously Mercedes needs to look into this because the last thing they want is Rosberg on quicker rubber and a lighter car at the end of the race…
I think Vettel and Senna would ram that car in a heartbeat especially if the championship was on the line and I think Lewis would be fully justified in doing so if it happens a 3rd time.13th May 2014, 14:19 at 2:19 pm #260225
Lastly i think 1KG = 0.1 seconds per lap, cars can have as much fuel in them as they want but are not allowed to consume more than 100 KG for the race at a rate of no more than 100KG per hour.
Really, I thought they can’t carry more than 100kgs. As far as I know there are 2 limits – a consumption fuel flow limit (100kg/hr not to be exceeded at any time)and a total amount limit.
Can someone clarify the regulations? I’m sure a dozen people know it off the top of their heads on this forum:)12th May 2014, 17:35 at 5:35 pm #260114
For performance to be equal, Lewis would have had to start with 2-3 kgs less fuel. I do recall Will Buxton saying that Lewis had more fuel so he could theoretically use that to hold off Rosberg as long as Lewis didn’t exceed the fuel usage threshold as Daniel had in Australia.
How would he have known that or was he simply assuming that both Merc drivers started with the same amount of fuel?
As you guys correctly pointed out, I deleted the race so I can’t go back and see what they showed us but I do recall the amount of fuel used going up while they displayed those statistics on the screen. That means that it’s definitely real-time and since it was going up it would have had to be amount used, not remaining which would have gone down as the race progressed.
Using 2-3kgs less fuel in a race while being in the lead and quickest car while your teammate is driving under similar conditions is very strange, at least to me. That’s a 5% fuel saving while you’re trying to go as fast as you possibly can – is that even possible?
What could possibly account for that lower usage? Is it the way that Lewis drives? Is he maxing the ERS and therefore using less fuel? Is Nico trying hard to catch up and using more fuel?
How much impact would those 3 extra kgs of fuel have at the end?16th March 2014, 21:08 at 9:08 pm #252909
I’m a little surprised to be reading how Kevin will have more points than Button at the end of the season especially after a single race.27th November 2013, 17:50 at 5:50 pm #245913
No doubt Alonso made a contribution in 2007as did Hamilton. As for Vettel it’s indisputable that RB would not be where it is without Vettel.
Double diffiuser in 2009 and tyres for PM in 2012.
I may even venture that Hamilton is very teammate friendly in the sense that his teammates seem to benefit from his presence on a team and he “elevates” their performance. I’m not sure if he gets much benefit or if his own performance is elevated by his teammates. His struggles with Alonso, Button as well as Rosberg’s antics on the track this year suggest the opposite.27th November 2013, 16:58 at 4:58 pm #245911
I’m not sure we can use the season-to-season lap improvement of a single GP – track conditions, weather, tyre choices, in season improvements, custom changes just for that GP can easily skew that. If you just look at the qualifying speeds between 2012 and 2013 that didn’t have many regulation changes as far as I know, they are just all over the map.27th November 2013, 15:59 at 3:59 pm #245909
Why do you think Ferrari hired Kimi Raikonnen when LDM and Ferrari have been so staunchly opposed to having “2 roosters in the henhouse”? What prompted such an about-face if not Hamilton’s 474 point swing from McLaren to Mercedes?
It’s not 2 seconds. On a 1′ 40” lap a 1% improvement is 1 second and no driver can bring that. I’m thinking a 0.3%-0.5% improvement which is 0.3 seconds to 0.5 seconds per lap but ultimately the difference between P5 and P2 in the constructors championship.27th November 2013, 15:30 at 3:30 pm #245907
Hamilton, whilst driving well, did not help to build a better car before the season began
I think our difference in opinions stems from the fact that you believe that a car is designed before the season and that no improvements can be made to the car or the team during the winter break and in-season.
On the other hand, I believe there are 3 distinct phases to a car’s development:
1. Development before the winter break
2. Development during the winter break
3. In-season development
I think Mercedes built a good car in phase 1 but it was probably a P4-P5 car. During the winter, Hamilton joined and the car was bumped to a P3-P4 car/team. This is consistent with Merc’s start of the season where they didn’t dominate and Red Bull and Ferrari did better.
Then Hamilton and Rosberg were able to contribute and the car eventually ended up scoring 8 poles (almost 10) and 3 victories with Hamilton being on the front grid pretty much in every race for many GPs. Then the tyres changed and Hamilton (& Merc) simply didn’t have an answer (including many other drivers and constructors).
On the other hand, McLaren built a fundamentally flawed car in Phase 1 but they weren’t able to correct it in Phases 2 and 3. With Hamilton, however, they would have been able to do better and secure a podium – perhaps he would have taken the team in a different direction and they would have avoided their disastrous season or saved face.27th November 2013, 14:26 at 2:26 pm #245904
Like I said some will agree, some will disagree. It all depends on what impact you believe a driver has. In any other sport we would not question that. For instance, if Messi left Barca and they scored 100 fewer goals during the season, we’d put down a lot of that to Messi. If the other team won the Champions League that Messi joined, we’d put that down to Messi.
Look at it the other way, if McLaren had scored 860 points this year (43 pts per race), wouldn’t we all say that they are better off without Hamilton and that Hamilton affected the team negatively?
F1 is a zero-sum game – the points gained by 1 team come at a loss for another team as there is a finite number of points. All the points lost by McLaren went to Mercedes, that cannot be coincidence especially when Merc was floundering at the end of the last season. If they had a clue, they would have fixed the W03 chassis.
Hamilton brought clarity and unity to the team and McLaren lost that. What was the net effect of that? Maybe a 0.3%-0.5% improvement which in terms of points is around 250 points and in terms of money, maybe 80 million dollars or a little more.