Did anyone else spot this during P1? It cracked me up, so I uploaded it to GFYCat.com 
Canadian Grand Prix 2014, Montréal - Race 7/19
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
There isn't much between them at all, I've got a feeling Hamilton will get by in the first lap for some reason, but then I can see Nico overtaking him later on and ultimately it coming down to which driver has the best strategy team behind them.
I hope Massa and Bottas get past Vettel though, Williams are such a decent and clean team I always enjoy seeing them near the front. About time Massa got a podium too, hope he does.
I hope Massa and Bottas get past Vettel though, Williams are such a decent and clean team I always enjoy seeing them near the front. About time Massa got a podium too, hope he does.
Did anyone else spot this during P1? It cracked me up, so I uploaded it to GFYCat.com
haha good spot, remember just looking at Ron for a reaction at that part so I was oblivious to the guy in the back ground.
I got a couple of good vids of Toto a few races back where some of his English skills were tested, very amusing
We should set up an 'F1 Funnies' thread for these videos
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Yeah, earlier on both in practice and maybe in q2 as well being that close behind a car meant Hamilton was a touch behind Rosberg but a clean lap went half a second faster a couple of times. I think if Riccy hadn't been in Hamilton's way on the first run he'd have been ahead, and done a cleaner less pressured second lap personally. He was exceptionally close while having that lock up and two bad corners, he lost more than the difference. he would have poled, how far ahead I have no idea but he almost certainly lost a few tenths in that corner.
Hamilton needs a good run at him in the first lap down the straight maybe, then get himself a gap before drs otherwise it could be difficult.
Are you sure about that, someone specifically mentioned that two of the test days would be dedicated to young drivers to maintain an option for them.
I hadn't seen anything suggesting a ban of in season testing. I was also under the impression that in season testing while it costs money, is cheaper for the smaller teams than having massive simulator programs and wind tunnels of their own.
It adds to cost but gives them better value for their money as rather than so much guess work in testing they can just take a few parts and compare without daft practice session timings and rules and number of cars on track so ultimately they get much more out of their R&D.
Some things can be fixed, obviously some flaws are fatal. For instance afaik Hamilton's spark plug cover failure means they replace a €1 part and the engine is working again.
So those numbers don't directly translate to say for Vettel 5 used means 4 are dead. It could be for instance 3 used, for this particular race they installed a new one (saving the partly used 3rd for a less intensive race), and the 4th one broke on the first day so they went to the 5th. But the 3rd is still ready to be used in a easier race and the 4th may be repairable.
In reality when you have 5 parts used, I'd expect at least 3 or 4 parts to be basically dead.
I am a little surprised that for most teams it seems the combustion engine has failed more than the kers or turbo, and the batteries have been the most reliable unit of all. I think I would have expected the turbo's to go more often than the engine itself.
Hell more surprising than that is with all the failures Lotus have had, they aren't the least reliable. Would be interesting to get a race distance total comparison though as Lotus could have the worst laps to failure rate I guess.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I think there could be a few changes in position, maybe on track pass, then a strategy change or two, but I think wall of champions, the number of laps, + number of cars + way the cars handle this year, if there aren't a couple safety cars I'll be surprised. When safety cars come in to it I don't know if there is a obvious winner.
Really want to see Williams on the podium if not competing for 1-2, but I get the suspicion Williams really will be the new old Merc. See if they either pit early or drop off early. I think unless they establish a 2+ second gap to the person infront within a couple laps or manage to shoot to the front then they'll struggle badly on tires.
Damon and Crofty mentioned that maybe they could dedicate 1 day at each of the pre season tests to young drivers. But it was a suggestion they just came up with while talking.
The full proposal to be put to the council is a reduction to 1x 90 minute practice session on Fridays, starting late in the afternoon, a full ban on in season testing, and a reduction of pre season testing to just 2x 4 day tests.
The full proposal to be put to the council is a reduction to 1x 90 minute practice session on Fridays, starting late in the afternoon, a full ban on in season testing, and a reduction of pre season testing to just 2x 4 day tests.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
They did, but next season won't be remotely as bad/close as it was. These were brand new engines, brakes, aero, front wings, everything. Next year, engine won't be new, just improved and software will be mostly bug free.
However as above I think that effectively teams would prefer to spend 55mil on R&D and 2-3 in season tests than 45-50mil on the R&D with no tests. Testing is key to identifying what parts of your R&D is working, getting the right direction. You get more value for your money spent if you can test properly without a focus on setting up for a race.
I would hope they'd turn down the proposal if it includes all of that. Friday session alone I think they might refuse but all of that, can't see it.
less testing means more likely more parts failing over the course of the season and lots more wasted R&D going the wrong direction and finding out too late. They can probably do with less preseason testing potentially but I think the in season testing makes the in season development more worthwhile.
However as above I think that effectively teams would prefer to spend 55mil on R&D and 2-3 in season tests than 45-50mil on the R&D with no tests. Testing is key to identifying what parts of your R&D is working, getting the right direction. You get more value for your money spent if you can test properly without a focus on setting up for a race.
I would hope they'd turn down the proposal if it includes all of that. Friday session alone I think they might refuse but all of that, can't see it.
less testing means more likely more parts failing over the course of the season and lots more wasted R&D going the wrong direction and finding out too late. They can probably do with less preseason testing potentially but I think the in season testing makes the in season development more worthwhile.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,282
Late start today.
The Friday plan is because for a lot of circuits nobody watches Friday.
But as a 3 day camper myself, I would be tempted to opt for le mans instead.
Just a bit of a trek though.
Rosberg is looking a lot more feisty these days, Hammi appears to have upset him.
We will see Rosberg trying a lot harder today.
But as a 3 day camper myself, I would be tempted to opt for le mans instead.
Just a bit of a trek though.
Rosberg is looking a lot more feisty these days, Hammi appears to have upset him.
We will see Rosberg trying a lot harder today.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,282
Too hard possibly?
Let's hope so, give him credit though, he's doing well.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Jul 2012
- Posts
- 16,084
- Location
- London
The camera man on Ted's notebook is a perv. I like it 
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,282
Much better than i expected. I just hope Hami's DNF earlier in the season isn't a deciding factor.
That only makes sense if the viewing numbers back it up, which I highly doubt ( especially considering even quali itself doesnt get the same numbers as the race itself.)
Believe it or not I was after fact rather than complete guess work
Those writing the cheques are always going to try and skew the stats in their favour though.
It just seems bizzare. Save a few thousand quid a race by paying for 1 less night in a hotel for your team, buy lose multiple millions through the loss of sponsor money and test drivers.
Its incredibly badly thought through, which on recent form, mean the FIA will be voting it in post haste
That chart just shows how many new parts have been unpacked and used. It has no bearing on how many have failed. Its likely that most parts are still being rotated, as in previous years they would unpack new engines at hard races and rotate older ones through practice sessions.
Vettel being on his 5th control unit doesn't in any way mean he's got 4 broken parts and only 1 new one left. Given the new regs its likely quicker to just unpack a new part if something is amiss, rather than waste critical time at a race trying to investigate the problem.
Didn't Caterham rotate through 3 control units at one race trying to diagnose a problem? None of them were broke, they were just trying different bits to try and diagnose issues.