|
Post by mikael on Jul 30, 2018 7:34:22 GMT
Carl, it might be just a bit of playing mind-games with Vettel. As I understand it, his (Alonso's) relationship with Hamilton is good; and it might not be high on his wish list to see Vettel succeeding in taking home the Championship for Ferrari.
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Jul 30, 2018 7:44:35 GMT
The Hungarian Grand Prix failed to deliver what qualifying promised. Once Seb passed Kimi into the first corner and stayed in front But behind the two Mercs, Ferrari were doomed to play second best. I thought at the time that Ferrari should have let Kimi past to harry the Mercs into rooting their tyres but it was not to be. I thought "Seb let Kimi through he is on a different strategy" would have been the right call. Ferrari then messed up Seb's pitstop which compounded the problem.
Hamilton drove well but that is what he is paid the big bucks for and after a couple of 100 Grand Prix that is what I would expect from him, nothing less. He was never under pressure at any time after the start. I feel for Valteri as it only dawned on him after the race that he was and will be the sacrificial lamb this season despite what the team tell him to his face. This much was apparent with the arrogant throw away line that Tonto Woolfe made to the Sky presenters straight after the race. Even during the race Hamilton was asking how Valteri's tyres were holding up. Not out of any concern for Valteri's wellbeing, as thought by the sycophantic Sky reporters, but how it would affect Hamilton's race and whether he would need to drive faster. Hamilton and the pit wall obviously knew more about the team strategy than poor Valteri, who is a really nice guy.
Red Bull made a real public issue about their engine issues aided by a leading question from Martin Brundle. Well what do they expect? They have slated Renault publicly for three years, treating them like poor cousins even though they were in a technical partnership. They then pour salt into the wounds by changing to Honda just before Renault's home Grand Prix. I think they deserve to get second best treatment from Renault for the rest of the season. Renault are a proud organisation with a very long and distinguished history in motor sport and the automotive industry and they do not deserve to get flipped off in public by an upstart drinks team.
Finally there has been a lot of comment on this site lately about the quality of commentating on TV. I have stayed out of it because for the most part it hasn't really worried me though I have discerned an increasing jingoism from the Sky team. Well that came to an end yesterday. Brundle really pissed me off with his fanboy attitude to the great Hamilton and then his total blame of Seb for Valteri running into the back of him. He was adamant that it was Sebs fault and kept on repeating it for about five or more minutes. Totally unprofessional and biased. He has now dropped off my every shortening list of good and informative commentators and joins DC as a stupid person when commentating.
The last couple of weeks have been rather disappointing for me. My fault for wishing ill on Mercedes I guess. I am really looking forward to the break from F1 now. It has been too intense.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 9:09:12 GMT
I'm not sure I'd agree that around 620bhp is particularly low strung. Now I may be annoying ... but 620 HP for a 3.4 L turbocharged racing engine - it's comparable with a new standard Porsche 911 Turbo S (560 HP for a 3.8 L engine), so I still think it's low-strung for a supposedly full-blooded racing engine. But as you say, it's a spec-series. 620 HP for a 3.4 L - that's 182 HP per litre. Now I cannot resist bragging about my old (2005), trusty Mazda 13B Wankel engine, which supposedly develops 192 HP per litre at the red-line (again, it's a Wankel, but non-turbocharged). It's good! In comparison, the F1 engines are truly amazing. I don't know how the fuel flow rate is for an F2 engine, but I kind of imagine it's larger than the 100 kg/hour allowed in F1. And how much do the best F1 engines develop now, "raw", without the electric motor (MGU-K)? Probably 800 HP (and 200 HP for the electric motor). So it's something like 500 HP per litre at 100 kg fuel per hour. Yep, and the Ferrari F488 has a 3.9l twin turbo that puts out 670bhp, and the swept volume of a wankel engine isn't really comparable to that of a reciprocating engine.......We could go on , but I think you're missing my point. I think the guys who just want 'drivers racing', care little for the technical side of F1. So even a spec turbo V6 and spec wings are probably more tech than they would want, or care about. The fact you, like me, think that it is "truely amazing" that the current hybrids are producing over 1000bhp at 100l/hr fuel flow (625bhp/l from a 1.6l I.c.e!!!), probably means you'd be a fan of Formula Awesome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 9:44:36 GMT
One last post (for the moment). This race will be a real test for the recently reformed Ver-crash-en. He's starting from 7th, in amongst Honda powered Toro Rosso's and behind Sainz in a Renault, with the Ferrari powered Haas cars on his gearbox. With all those cars so close, a long run down to the tight first turn, and a track where passing is difficult, the opportunities for a bit of contact are high. He's done well in the past four races (only two light touches) but I think the temptation to get back on track with his quest to hit every car on the grid this season might prove too strong. Yayyy for Ver-crash-en! It was only a cameo performance from the young Dutchman, because of the MGU-K failure, but he managed to give Sainz a healthy clatter on the way past. Beautiful work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 9:51:40 GMT
I stillhaven't really bought into the modern F2 - and thanks to Jamie I am at least aware of it, as i won't get sxy on principal i only get to watch it on ytub and that generally is when Jamie mentions it, and inevitably it is really worth watching so amalways grateful for that reminder - what would be fantastic is if there could be some stand alone races as well? it would be great - for instance if say there a F2 race back at Birmingham or Zandvoort- That could be a way of keeping costs down. While FA is off to exotic parts of the world, FD could be run at some of Europe's more challenging circuits, on the same weekend, in different timezones, so it would be easy to avoid broadcast time clashes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2018 10:02:35 GMT
Bottas went a bit nuts at the end didn’t he 😁 The rabbid red fans on MS will be quoting all sorts of foul 😂 Tee hee! more out of mischief than rabbid Redness, I was hoping that Vettel or Arivabenne would be saying after the race, "It is a lot of constructors’ [championship] points. Do you think it is deliberate or incompetence?, this leaves us with a judgement.”........ Its amazing how quickly things can turn around in F1.
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Jul 30, 2018 10:14:14 GMT
Rob,
It comes to something when someone such as you writes a comment as above, for you have been the strongest supporter of F1 in this current age. What you have commented upon has been my "hobby horse" for some considerable time with regard to TV commentary; I am like a stuck vinyl record at times with this in mind.
As the weather was pretty wet on Sunday (first proper rain for us in over 5 weeks) I decided to watch the live coverage and it had to be S*Y Sports F1, which I was able to view on my computer in Ultra HD thanks to one of the "specialist sites". The presentation and commentary did not disappoint as they were up to the usual standard, being chauvinistically jingoistic in the extreme. Martin Brundle has irritated me for the past few years with his comments, exemplified by the truly awful "Grid Walk", however he does at times revert to the man he really should be, as per Rosberg's Interview. He did come out with something sensible during the build up when he really got stuck into the unfairness of the current financial system that is placing the smaller teams at great risk, hats off there Martin.
The rest of that team are poor at best, and it comes to something when Natalie Pinkham seems the best of the bunch. Of course as I mentioned on Saturday the UK Channel 4 is now as bad; and as Chris mentions earlier the main presenter is a complete "kn*b" and really should return too children's TV or sensationalistic reality shows.
We have all outlined excellent TV commentary of late, it is out there and this is what F1 coverage should have, not this garbage that is being churned out for the new to F1 audience.
One or two observations regarding the event itself. I agree that Ferrari's strategy was poor, as was their pitstops for both drivers. Whether it was the team or Sebastian, they screwed up big time from the very beginning. What was the purpose of having Kimi on Ultra Soft tyres and then for Sebastian to overtake him and make a pigs ear of the potential that Kimi had to pressure the MB's. If you ask me Vettel showed a marked lack of nous in that manoeuvre and there were shades of his Red Bull days there with Webber. Can you imagine JYS or Lauda thinking like that; me neither.
With regard to Vettel's overtake on Bottas, I tend to think that Sebastian was not completely correct in cutting back as sharply as he did, something he and the Mighty Hamilton make a habit of doing. He was very lucky to not cut his tyre and then would have been looking very stupid.
Red Bull and Renault, I agree totally, just cannot stand that team, particularly the management who are unctuous individuals. Renault played a major part in their four championships, but of course all that was down to the genius of Newey. What is the saying "we win together and loose together".
Tonto's comment after the race about Bottas being a "great wingman" was typical of the fool; thoughtless and cannon fodder for the media. Also very dispiriting for the Finn who surely must know his place within the team by now. Tonto joins an ever growing list of unprofessional clowns who now proliferate in F1 team management; sadly the days of men with real intelligence , integrity and knowledge like Ken Tyrrell; Rob Walker; Bruce & Jack to name but a few, are now gone.
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Jul 30, 2018 21:09:07 GMT
years ago we used to talk of the 'silly season' and it referred to who was going where next year, now it is all year long and it is just anything connected to F1
Jim, interesting point about the technology, I was fascinated by the 1992 Williams and its wizardry - by KERS and by Colin Chapman's innovations, by the grunt of a 1.5ltr engine with a couple of turbo's stuck on that produced enormous raw grunt that was so unrefined it was brilliant but these hybrids - I just can't get fascinated by them, i love the power but 30 years ago we had more power and a lot more fun
What now for Bottas? Tonto has confirmed to Valteri that - sorry son, you ain't number one- or two, come to that, you are what we decide- what do you? stay with a company that treats you with disrespect and you may be allowed to pick up a few crumbs from the almighty one's table, or doyou stick to your integrity and go elsewhere
I have never been a fan of RB and remember having a discusison on MS with someone who extolled RB's virtues, and yes they have bought a lot of money to sports but i still ain't gonna drink your stuff
question? is a good loser a loser?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 8:59:21 GMT
Jim, interesting point about the technology, I was fascinated by the 1992 Williams and its wizardry - by KERS and by Colin Chapman's innovations, by the grunt of a 1.5ltr engine with a couple of turbo's stuck on that produced enormous raw grunt that was so unrefined it was brilliant but these hybrids - I just can't get fascinated by them, i love the power but 30 years ago we had more power and a lot more fun What now for Bottas? Tonto has confirmed to Valteri that - sorry son, you ain't number one- or two, come to that, you are what we decide- what do you? stay with a company that treats you with disrespect and you may be allowed to pick up a few crumbs from the almighty one's table, or doyou stick to your integrity and go elsewhere Chris, I'm probably just more nerdy. I've also enjoyed all those earlier era's, especially the active suspension, ground effects, and the 20,000 rpm V8's, but times and technology move on. The current hybrid p.u's and the crazy inticate aero are just as fascinating to me. With Bottas, I hope he takes the Rosberg route, and focuses his undoubted skill and Finish Sisu to beat Hamilton. As we've seen, Hamilton will take his eye off the ball from time to time, and Bottas can beat Hamilton on those occasions
|
|
|
Post by robmarsh on Jul 31, 2018 14:28:31 GMT
I see that Mercedes now say that it was just a misunderstanding between Bottas and Woolfe and there was nothing sinister at all. Mark Hughes said in his report that both drivers had agreed that whoever was second into the first corner would play wingman for the other. I wonder.
Sadly though in one of his replies to a question as to whether Hamilton would have stuck to the agreement had he been second Hughes said not sure and then said Senna hadn't in 1989 in Imola against Prost when both were still at McLaren. This irritates me intensely. The agreement was that whoever led at the start would not be challenged into the first corner. At the start of the Imola race Senna took the lead from pole and at the end of three laps had a 2.7 second lead. Berger then had his huge accident at Tamburello and the race was stopped and restarted to run in two heats. One of three laps and one of 55. They started in the order they completed lap three. Prost led but Senna passed him before the first corner. After the race Prost complained to all and sundry that Senna could not be trusted as he broke the agreement. As per usual the English press, with one exception and spearheaded by Roebuck backed Prost. That exception was Jenks whose view was that Prost was whining because in terms of the rules that the race was being run Senna was ahead by a couple of seconds. I spport Jenks view as it is the most logical. I expect Hughes for all his love of history to have got that right. He didn't.
|
|
|
Post by mikael on Jul 31, 2018 15:22:06 GMT
Now I may be annoying ... but 620 HP for a 3.4 L turbocharged racing engine - it's comparable with a new standard Porsche 911 Turbo S (560 HP for a 3.8 L engine), so I still think it's low-strung for a supposedly full-blooded racing engine. But as you say, it's a spec-series. 620 HP for a 3.4 L - that's 182 HP per litre. Now I cannot resist bragging about my old (2005), trusty Mazda 13B Wankel engine, which supposedly develops 192 HP per litre at the red-line (again, it's a Wankel, but non-turbocharged). It's good! In comparison, the F1 engines are truly amazing. I don't know how the fuel flow rate is for an F2 engine, but I kind of imagine it's larger than the 100 kg/hour allowed in F1. And how much do the best F1 engines develop now, "raw", without the electric motor (MGU-K)? Probably 800 HP (and 200 HP for the electric motor). So it's something like 500 HP per litre at 100 kg fuel per hour. Yep, and the Ferrari F488 has a 3.9l twin turbo that puts out 670bhp, and the swept volume of a wankel engine isn't really comparable to that of a reciprocating engine.......We could go on , but I think you're missing my point. I think the guys who just want 'drivers racing', care little for the technical side of F1. So even a spec turbo V6 and spec wings are probably more tech than they would want, or care about. The fact you, like me, think that it is "truely amazing" that the current hybrids are producing over 1000bhp at 100l/hr fuel flow (625bhp/l from a 1.6l I.c.e!!!), probably means you'd be a fan of Formula Awesome.
Jim, when reading your response to Chris, I see that we are very much on the same wavelength. I have (also) been fascinated by the technology in F1 as long as I can remember. When watching F1, it really matters to know that the cars are the very best that "we" (the human race) are capable of. (Hence F2 would not excite me very much more than, say, Formula Ford.) F1 has never been all wheel-to-wheel battles from flag to flag. It's more about perfection, poetry in motion (to borrow one of Carl's nice sentences). Thus I have hardly ever seen any race as directly boring.
|
|
|
Post by charleselan on Jul 31, 2018 16:24:42 GMT
Chris,
I can fully empathise with your view on the technology of race cars past and present. Back in the 1960's as a young teenager I used to read everything that DSJ wrote about the cars; his "Continental Notes" feature in MS every month always contained details of the cars and the modifications carried out as the season transpired. Nothing like the material that we get now as there wasn't the opportunity to publish the amount we now have. It always fascinated me, the changes to the suspension layouts such as the repositioning of the rear radius arms etc. Then wonderful little things like Colin Chapman's fertile mind with items like the "wind deflector screen" that appeared on the Lotus 25 in 1963.
Then again we had the increase in tyre widths which more or less began in 1964; and then the advent of wings/aerofoils. It was an amazing time and at that time I loved the high mounted wings but little did we realise the problems they would create, and then of course the issue of wings today.
Ground effect was incredible on conception but it brought about a savage period in F1 car design that could have brought about serious physical problems to the drivers in later life due to the extremes that these cars brought to bear. The 1980 "turbo" era was all brute raw power but incredible to behold with lots of developments going on, and boundaries being pushed in many ways.
Today I cannot get worked up about these current things. Firstly I find their very appearance to be an affront to the eye, aesthetically they are terrible right from the appendages that direct air flow to that grotesque thing called a "toilet seat". Having F1 cars that are the size of medium sized commercial vehicles is ludicrous to my way of thinking.
One can obviously be amazed at the technology that goes into the "power units" but to me they leave me quite cold. F1 cars have long since been self sustaining, in that they cannot be started without banks of computers and technicians there to begin the process. To me it is an internal combustion engine that lights my fire, I don't care whether it is a single cylinder or a V16, for it is the sound, smell and aura that they have.
I am therefore a dinosaur.
|
|
|
Post by Jamie on Jul 31, 2018 17:52:52 GMT
To be honest chaps I don’t see the jingoism oft mentioned about the sky commentary team, though as a British based affair they do naturally lean towards the Brits but generally I think Martin Brundle is excellent - except for the grid walk which sometimes makes my toes curl, I expect MB would rather drop that aspect of the coverage as well 😁 I didn’t agree with his assessment of the Bottas / Seb incident at the weekend however as it was a 50/50 racing incident in my book. It was a overly ambitious move from VB and Seb cut across the line sharper than he needed to ......50/50. Thankfully Seb didn’t get any damage. I feel Martin is usually spot on though and he gave his honest opinion at the time which I, for one, like. I used to like that in James Hunt’s commentary too....didn’t always agree...but I’d hate for ‘vanilla’ to become the norm.
I agree with you Rob, the whole F1 season feels a bit intense at the moment with every little driver error or comment pounced upon and interrogated to within an inch of its life 😡 These guys and gals are operating under intense pressure and scrutiny now......they can’t say or do anything without it turning into a bloody media / armchair expert feeding frenzy......Jeeeez. No wonder we have no real characters in the sport nowadays......where are the Hunts, the Kekes, the Brambillas, the Mansells, the Sennas...etc,etc. Please don’t tell me Kimi is a character...he’s the best we’ve got but come on...
Sorry for the rant but I’ve just had a look at the comments on MS after Mark’s report.....my god, so much pond life in evidence. How Mark doesn’t tell people to go **** themselves I don’t know 😤 Couldn’t help but bait one particularly nauseating individual - I felt quite dirty afterwards 😆 Thank god for the good people at the ROTRT, civilised debate is always constructive 👍 Even if we don’t agree, the respect is there, it really has become poisonous over at MS (and has been for some while).
Excuse me whilst I go for a lie down in a darkened room for a while 👍
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Aug 1, 2018 5:14:45 GMT
Jim and Mikael, I like innovation, and the whole scene just feels robotic not mesmeric, banks of computers as per some sort of Orwellien nightmare dictating how, when and what a driver does, for me it detracts but i so enjoy listening and watching others enjoy their favourite aspects of our beloved sport - and whilst i do like the grunt these monsters produce I cannot abide the wing thing [DRS] as opposed to KERS which just made sense and could have led to such great things and how they really screwed up there. I also feel the toilet seat is just such an eye-sore whilst Indycars are starting to show the way again,
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Aug 1, 2018 5:22:50 GMT
Johnasauras - dinosaurs togther! I loved the continental columm but best of all I enjoyed Jenks's reflections and my favourite one was Jenks in raptures reflecting on the 1966 Dutch GP, one of my favourite races of all time, and how pertinent his words were after this years Hungarian GP,
I haven't forgiven the FIA for banning the Lotus 88 yet, as I said to Jim and Mikael I love innovation - the ability to think laterally is what is fascinating to me, these monsters are not in my view innovative and represents corporate imaging not motor racing-
Hungary is a neat little circuit but when it first appeared we raced at the following: Jacarepagua - San Marino - Monaco- Spa - Montreal - Paul Ricard - Brands Hatch - Hockenheim - Osterreichring - Monza- Estoril - Mexico - Adelaide - and now.....
|
|