Chinese GP 2009 - Race 3/17

vcl_X1 · 15 Apr 2009 at 21:18

knip said:
and the bit that hangs down to the ground

That's part of the diffuser, you may have picked up on a few mentions here and there over the last few weeks

rpstewart · 15 Apr 2009 at 21:26

NathanE said:
His replacement will be Mike Gascoigne.

Hopefully he'll not suffer his usual fate of doing a good job and getting sacked for it...

rpstewart · 15 Apr 2009 at 21:27

fini said:
News just in: In a potentially illegal modification to the car, Ferrari have reportedly modified Raikkonen's front wing by strapping a choc ice to it [/IMG]

Nah, it's so he doesn't need to go back to the motorhome for his mid race Magnum like last time

Locke · 15 Apr 2009 at 21:32

HOPEFULLY, we get an actual race this time, a full non interupted type. (Cause I have holiday this week

)

PS: GET IN @ the diffuser ruling (Sorry, just got in from Thorpe Park and was looking at my phone all day for the result

)

Masterdog · 15 Apr 2009 at 21:50

Good news about Mike Gascoigne being in China - surely one of the most undervalued F1 technical bods. Always interested to hear what he had to say when interviewed in previous seasons.

NathanE · 15 Apr 2009 at 22:03

I don't like him personally but he at least brings more to the table than Eddie Jordan does

Duke · 15 Apr 2009 at 22:05

Mike Gascoigne is nice. Walked past him in the paddock at the Silverstone test last year; he was acknowledging people (fans like me) around him as he walked rather than being stuck up if you know what I mean.

knip · 16 Apr 2009 at 08:13

vcl_X1 said:
That's part of the diffuser, you may have picked up on a few mentions here and there over the last few weeks

I was trying not to talk about it in case any of the other forum members claimed it was illegal

vcl_X1 · 16 Apr 2009 at 08:34

rpstewart said:
Hopefully he'll not suffer his usual fate of doing a good job and getting sacked for it...

Did anyone go to Goodwood the year he drove the Jordan, lit up the tyres off the line and then into second gear and off into the straw bales and almost into a tree?

I'll not be missing EJ this weekend.

vcl_X1 · 16 Apr 2009 at 08:37

knip said:
I was trying not to talk about it in case any of the other forum members claimed it was illegal

Let em take it up with the ICA if they think that, oh wait ...they can't it's legal ...at least until Mclaren use it to beat the red cars in the latter stages of a down to the wire championship.

jbstans · 16 Apr 2009 at 13:03

Very much looking forward to another race and to see if McLaren can deliver on their promise of a step forward in performance!

Bridgestone bringing the supoer softs seems truely insane though :confused:

Mr Jack · 16 Apr 2009 at 14:17

jbstans said:
Bridgestone bringing the supoer softs seems truely insane though

With the silly new tyre rullings I don't think they have much choice. The hardest compoud (what are we calling the two harder compounds anyway?) probably doesn't generate enough heat. So while the SSs degrade away in a matter of moments, they're at least quick while they're there.

NathanE · 16 Apr 2009 at 14:29

This whole idea by the FIA to force Bridgestone to bring what are effectively the wrong tyres to a track is completely stupid.

Alonso has it spot on when he says it just makes the sport and its drivers look stupid. One lap they are hooning round, then they pit for tyres, and then they're 6 seconds slower because the tyre is the wrong type for the track...

It's ridiculous and just smacks of the FIA panicing that the 09 car rules aren't good enough to bring about overtaking.

vcl_X1 · 16 Apr 2009 at 14:33

Mr Jack said:
what are we calling the two harder compounds anyway?)

How about :-

Super soft, Soft, Hard & Ultra hard?

On one hand I like this new rule, but on tracks where the super soft is the prime tyre then the hard would presumably be horrid, likewise anywhere the ultra hard is best then the soft will go off in no time

Dorje · 16 Apr 2009 at 14:33

Not sure if already mentioned, but Ferrari are not running KERS in China.

Dutch Guy · 16 Apr 2009 at 15:08

If they want to cut costs, why don't they only allow one tyre compound instead of faffing around with two where one is totally useless?

Glaucus · 16 Apr 2009 at 15:08

Dutch Guy said:
If they want to cut costs, why don't they only allow one tyre compound instead of faffing around with two where one is totally useless?

would make far more sense, The whole two tyre rule is pointless. I don't see how it adds anything to the racing.

Overlag · 16 Apr 2009 at 15:17

i think its interesting how some cars cope with the "bad" tyres better than others.

also adds to stratagy. seems ok so far.

rpstewart · 16 Apr 2009 at 15:23

Dutch Guy said:
If they want to cut costs, why don't they only allow one tyre compound instead of faffing around with two where one is totally useless?

AcidHell2 said:
would make far more sense, The whole two tyre rule is pointless. I don't see how it adds anything to the racing.

Couldn't agree more. The "must use both tyres rule" was brought in so that Bridgestone didn't have a load of unused tyres but I fail to understand why it was necessary to have a second tyre available in the first place.

When only one tyre is available then there is no right tyre and no wrong tyre, just the tyre.

PinkFloyd · 16 Apr 2009 at 15:40

Another vote for just one type of tyre. There is no need for 2.