Motorsport Off Topic Thread

El_Watcher said:
Although you couldn't beat a 100% record, you could technically do it better by finishing higher on the podium each time. :p
I am sure some of Schumacher's finishes were thirds or seconds.
Click to expand...

Finished 3rd once IIRC (edit - for once my memory failed me so I had to look up how many times he came second - five times). But the record in question is 'Most podium finishes in a season'. That can only really be 'beaten' with a longer season, which makes comparisons between said season and 2002 about as meaningless as comparing points totals across years with differing points schemes. Which is presumably why they go with percentages to set the record.

Now, if the record was titled 'Highest average finishing position in a season' then Schumacher's record could conceivably be exceeded by someone coming along and winning every race :)
 
Last edited:
utajoker said:
I of course meant beat it with more races.

the record is 17/17 podium finishes in a season so surely 20/20 podium finishes beats this.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but as I said it makes the statistic meaningless when you change the length of the season - who's to say that the F2002 wouldn't have put Schumacher on the podium 20 out of 20 in a longer '02 season? After all, it was still good enough to win a race the next season after all the teams had the winter to prepare something all-new (or in McLaren's case, **** it all up and have to run a crash programme to rework and update their '02 challenger).

Maybe "Consecutive podium finishes" would be better. Schumacher currently holds that record at 19 (US GP '01 to Japanese GP '02). And that statistic gets scary when you look at team performance. Neither Ferrari made it onto the podium at Melbourne in '03. The last time that happened? Nurburgring '99.
 
In things like this percentages are always better than absolute numbers. The changing number of races a season (or points system, race distances, whatever) means results cannot be compared.
 
First glance of the 2014 Renault engine.

j8e2fGI.jpg


L3CUzi8.jpg


ERS parts:
vE5kBp9.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm no expert, but could they not split the inlet feed to go through 2 inter coolers?

Although with the increased gubbins around the engine I expect the oil cooler and electrical components will make their way into the second sidepod.

It does show nicely how the ERS is now a fully embedded part of the engine, and not a bolt on any more.
 
Skeeter said:
I'm no expert, but could they not split the inlet feed to go through 2 inter coolers?
Click to expand...

Could do, and indeed I've seen some twin-intercooler single-turbo setups on road cars (usually where packaging constraints force two small intercoolers rather than one larger one). But I don't think you get any real performance gains if one intercooler is doing the job - you can only cool the inlet charge so much after all.
 
dcA788H.jpg


Looks like we could be back to some nice short wheel-base cars ala the late 90s, which is a definite plus from me. Sidepods could soon be a thing of the past.
 
Spunkey said:
Looks like we could be back to some nice short wheel-base cars ala the late 90s, which is a definite plus from me. Sidepods could soon be a thing of the past.
Click to expand...

One of the big problems with shortening the wheelbase is the safety aspect - the drivers feet have to be behind the front axle line, so unless you really cramp up the oily bits and throw the weight distribution off you can't really shorten the car all that much. The smaller engines will help, but all those energy recovery systems have to go somewhere and I suspect the overall length of the '14 cars wont be much shorter than what we have now.
 
The complete 2014 power units aren't smaller. Infact, the minimum weight of the cars has been increased to account for their increased size.

While they have lost 2 cylinders, they have gained a turbo system on the end and 2 electric motors within the block.

The reason current F1 cars are significantly longer than early 2000s cars is due to the much larger fuel tanks.
 
In a little over 20 years they've added around 20 inches to the wheelbase - the Ferrari 642 from 1991 had a wheelbase of 111 inches, I'm led to believe that 130 inches is about typical for the modern grid.

And that Ferrari had a 3.5 litre V12, bulky first-gen semi automatic gearbox and gigantic fuel tank hanging around in the middle of it :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom