Motorsport Off Topic Thread

I can understand the sniping between Bell and Arai over this (going by the article) as at the end of the day they are both competing in the same space and want maximum exposure, but it seems a little petty given the helmet as a device is there primarily to do one very important job - save a drivers life. The commercialism should come a distant second with something like this.

Surprised we don't see more sponsorship on HANS devices!
 
drunkenmaster said:
Interesting stuff about Mehri being rumoured as well. I don't think it's confirmed, but he might be losing his seat.

He has been awful in comparison to Stevens but there are some claims about exactly why he's been as bad as he is.



Now, is this just excuse making after maybe losing his seat or be about to lose his seat, no idea. He has been miles and miles behind Stevens but maybe that isn't based on talent at all. In which case he's getting an extremely unfair 'shot' at F1 compared to Stevens, but then money will do that for you.

In Formula 3.5 in which Sainz Jr won it, Merhi came 3rd with Stevens in 6th. Merhi had more wins, more poles, more podiums and what, same cars, how much difference is there between teams, how well they maintain the cars or bigger differences, use the same chassis/engine for everyone?

Either way, you can somewhat understand that Merhi might not be as far back as he's seeming.

Also sounds like he's not a pay driver. Booth was asked to find a pay driver but signed Merhi instead and was given 4 races to come up with a sponsor. So the idea was if he showed something in 4 races someone would come up with a couple million for him to continue. As he's effectively been held back with issues that isn't looking likely to happen.

Maybe Stevens backers should come up with the 2mil to keep him looking good :p
Click to expand...

You know it's a broken system when people are having to pay so much money for a seat at the back of the grid as there is pretty much no way to break into F1 based on talent unless you are one of the very lucky few to be picked up by a big team.
 
Nismo said:
I can understand the sniping between Bell and Arai over this (going by the article) as at the end of the day they are both competing in the same space and want maximum exposure, but it seems a little petty given the helmet as a device is there primarily to do one very important job - save a drivers life. The commercialism should come a distant second with something like this.

Surprised we don't see more sponsorship on HANS devices!
Click to expand...


"I like helmets that are developing and improving." That's the point his making.
 
Guerrilla said:
You know it's a broken system when people are having to pay so much money for a seat at the back of the grid as there is pretty much no way to break into F1 based on talent unless you are one of the very lucky few to be picked up by a big team.
Click to expand...

The best talents are getting sponsorship from a younger age, it's that simple. Hamilton is maybe the best around, talent is exactly why Mclaren chose to back him. Hamilton wouldn't be in F1 without Mclaren backing as they paid for most of his equipment/drivers/cars from a pretty low level. I'm under the impression his dad basically used his life savings at that point to get him into competitive karting, not sure how many years of karting he backed before Mclaren came in.

Motorsports is not cheap, it was 25k for Hamilton to get equipped for the lowest rung on the karting scene.... it quickly becomes a quarter of a mil for the lower end single seat formula's and so on.

The sport will always be dominated by money because cars that often get crashed and damaged and have expensive parts will always require more money than say, a football kit, a few pairs of boots and a few dozen footballs a year.

Even then, Mehri was given a 'free' drive in F1 and at least 4 races(in theory, 3 in reality) to show his stuff and try and get some backing. That is relatively fair considering the costs of building/running a car even over just these 4 races.

Pretty much the best to the worst drivers in F1 will have had a huge amount of money behind them at some stage, where it came from and why is really the only difference. Some guys have rich parents/family who are willing to stump up the probably minimum several million to go through the various ranks in various formula's before reaching F1. Others show their talent at an early age like Hamilton and get the same financial backing but based on talent rather than basically generosity. Mclaren didn't pay for Hamilton for nothing, they saw him as a future world champion who would pay back the relatively small sum to get him up to F1 in the long term.
 
deuse said:
"I like helmets that are developing and improving." That's the point his making.
Click to expand...

And as Arai put it, the underdeveloped helmet has won the last X number of WDCs.

You could probably have worn a colander in last year's Merc. or the previous 4 RB cars and still won as long as it offered the same amount of head protection :p
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
The best talents are getting sponsorship from a younger age, it's that simple. Hamilton is maybe the best around, talent is exactly why Mclaren chose to back him. Hamilton wouldn't be in F1 without Mclaren backing as they paid for most of his equipment/drivers/cars from a pretty low level...
Click to expand...

Hamilton is a great example of a race driver has been extremely fortunate (not to say he doesn't deserve it of course) but that's exactly my point. There is a tiny percentage of racers who will be picked up at such a young age, what about those who are missed? Who could be even more talented and more deserving and could even be better if given the same opportunities... There is currently no plan B, even the lower Formulas require a crazy amount of money, even drivers from wealthy backgrounds or funded by other ways can end up spending all their money in the lower formulas and then have nothing to buy their way in to F1.
 
Well the point really is, Hamilton was spotted. If you can't get on the lowest rung and show you're fast, no one will take interest, if you do, you probably will garner some interest. There is no plan b because, it does take millions. The guys who put millions forwards will only back those they see who they believe have the potential. They can't run around throwing money at everyone just in case someone is good.

There is only 20-26 cars potentially on a F1 grid, there is never going to be thousands of drivers, there are plenty of drivers in plenty of other series. A decent portion of the best of those have had a shot at F1. In general teams that need cash pick the most successful of the pay drivers, the teams that don't need the cash pick the best drivers they can. Not sure what needs to change in that sense.

It isn't really a money thing so much as a numbers thing. RBR only need so many drivers in their young drivers program, even though they have the cash if they want 8 drivers, they get 8 drivers, if they want 50, they get that. But with the goal to get 4 drivers into F1, sponsoring 50 drivers doesn't help them.

It's no different in football. Teams take what they perceive to be the best be it 8yr olds, or 16yr olds, or 21yr olds. Thousands of potentially top footballers get left out, for thousand of reasons. One manager doesn't like a kid because he's a bit fat at 15 but could be slim and fast or built like a rock at 22 and the best footballer around. With almost zero money involved at that point, thousands of kids get left behind. It's the same in every sport. People have a number of kids/adults they need and they pick who they think is the best. better drivers, footballers, cross country runners, javelin throwers are all being potentially left behind because at a specific stage a coach doesn't pick them for one reason or another, valid or invalid. That is life.

When you go out there and destroy everyone at every level, chances are they are one of the best and like Hamilton, will likely get backing.
 
drunkenmaster said:
Well the point really is, Hamilton was spotted. If you can't get on the lowest rung and show you're fast, no one will take interest, if you do, you probably will garner some interest. There is no plan b because, it does take millions. The guys who put millions forwards will only back those they see who they believe have the potential. They can't run around throwing money at everyone just in case someone is good.

There is only 20-26 cars potentially on a F1 grid, there is never going to be thousands of drivers, there are plenty of drivers in plenty of other series. A decent portion of the best of those have had a shot at F1. In general teams that need cash pick the most successful of the pay drivers, the teams that don't need the cash pick the best drivers they can. Not sure what needs to change in that sense.

It isn't really a money thing so much as a numbers thing. RBR only need so many drivers in their young drivers program, even though they have the cash if they want 8 drivers, they get 8 drivers, if they want 50, they get that. But with the goal to get 4 drivers into F1, sponsoring 50 drivers doesn't help them.

It's no different in football. Teams take what they perceive to be the best be it 8yr olds, or 16yr olds, or 21yr olds. Thousands of potentially top footballers get left out, for thousand of reasons. One manager doesn't like a kid because he's a bit fat at 15 but could be slim and fast or built like a rock at 22 and the best footballer around. With almost zero money involved at that point, thousands of kids get left behind. It's the same in every sport. People have a number of kids/adults they need and they pick who they think is the best. better drivers, footballers, cross country runners, javelin throwers are all being potentially left behind because at a specific stage a coach doesn't pick them for one reason or another, valid or invalid. That is life.

When you go out there and destroy everyone at every level, chances are they are one of the best and like Hamilton, will likely get backing.
Click to expand...

Your point seems to be because Hamilton got picked up by McLaren and is now a 2 time WDC everyone who doesn't get picked up at karting level didn't prove they were good enough? What about those drivers who beat Hamilton on his way through various series despite not having the backing he did? It's real easy to just dismiss everyone because of 1 particular driver and using him as the blueprint for all others.
Hamilton is one of the lucky ones, but there aren't that many that are so fortunate.

You mention football but like you say there really isn't anywhere near the amount of cars on an F1 grid that there is football teams and players. The other difference with football is if a player gets picked up by a big club and gets dropped that doesn't necessarily mean he's never going to get his shot, he can move to another team, probably a lower division and work his way up that way, his way isn't blocked because there's no room as there are so many people paying a fortune to play for those lower teams... He would have his Plan B.
 
teknokid said:
Drunkmaster what are you basing your theories on? Do you work in motorsport?
Click to expand...

Logic, pictures, reading around, the general. Basically much like Scarbs. I'm not saying it isn't an axial compressor.

I'm not saying I know at all what the Honda engine is, I'm just applying logical thought to the information we do know. Scarbs posts on f1technical, he has spent 6 months saying that he is certain the Honda engine has a radial compressor at the front of the engine like Merc. Some pictures showing part(but not the front) of that engine on wed/thurs, Scarbs again posted a sketch showing a Merc style engine and saying that is what it was. Two days later the more detailed pictures showed the front, showed it definitely wasn't that type of engine.

A day or two after Scarbs sees those pictures, he's done a complete u-turn on something he claimed to know(I'm fairly sure he said Mclaren guys had told him it was like that but may have only been talking about the mgu-h.

The axial compressor has been a theory on the same forum for months, but most people are saying while a nice idea, it's basically not possible. Rules prevent multi stage compressors, a fairly fundamental part of axial compressors is that they only really become useful or superior to radial compressors in multi stage usage, single stage axial compressor is near enough pointless.

Again it's now about saying it is or isn't X type of compressor. It's applying some logic to the source. People like to think if someone is a certified journalist they must have more knowledge than you, that is bull, they certainly might, it's not a given they do.

Fact is both reading on f1technical and all the reasons they believe it can't be an axial compressor, and looking up basic compressor explanations/diagrams on google, I can see why it most likely wouldn't be. I also look at what Scarbs has been saying for months and where his new information came from, and even the way parts of the article are written. A series of fans is basically saying it's multi-stage... which is completely against the regulations.

Put all that together and I simply don't take Scarbs article seriously, I take the ongoing discussion on the f1technical forum and the multitude of threads and points people make as a good place to learn though.

You don't have to have any pre-existing or technical knowledge yourself to decide if Scarbs is right or wrong. You can have a look at where his information came from(no source claimed), that we know he wasn't in Bahrain, that he was posting on this forum in response to the pictures, what he's been saying for months and his sudden complete u-turn right after pictures proving he was wrong surface.

The article comes across to me as someone who was proven wrong, didn't want to look wrong, so quickly got an article out there so his current view wasn't one that had already been disproved, nothing more or less.
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
...being posted on a forum.
Click to expand...

You mean F1Technical?

Skeeter said:
With any luck he'd stop posting his essays here!
Click to expand...

Well he's already spreading his essays to F1Technical (either that or it's a doppelganger), so it's unlikely :p

drunkenmaster said:
Basically much like Scarbs.
Click to expand...
I'm sure Scarbs has mentioned in the past that he has an Engineering degree :confused:
In which case he has a bit more of an understanding than those who simply regurgitate what they've read and seen elsewhere.
 
visibleman said:
I'm sure Scarbs has mentioned in the past that he has an Engineering degree :confused:
In which case he has a bit more of an understanding than those who simply regurgitate what they've read and seen elsewhere.
Click to expand...

yet again you're ignoring what you want to post whatever you want.

I haven't regurgitated anything thank you very much. I was merely analysing Scarbs article... can you post where that was done on the other forum using my words... no?


Might be hard to understand, but I don't claim to know what kind of compressor it was, I was merely pointing out that Scarbs quite clearly claimed something entirely different till the very second his 6 month talk of being certain it was one thing went out the window when the engine was finally pictured properly completely disproving what he'd been saying as recently as the 17th April.

90% of the people on f1 technical, of which many have degrees and many don't, generally agree that an axial compressor would one... be completely worthless as a single stage and two, it's against the rules to have more than a single stage. Why is it that dozens of people the massive majority think it's not possible... all people with interest in the technology who follow formula 1, but Scarbs believes it to be true carries more weight?

Scarbs did a complete u-turn on what he said the engine was directly after the previous assumptions was proven wrong
I'm fully qualified to read an article and decide for myself if I believe it, so are you. You are welcome to post why you think his article is accurate, I'm free to post why I think I believe the article is nonsense. Lots of people have degrees, that doesn't make them infallible. Scarbs himself made a completely different claim about the compressor in the past 6 months... so he's admitting he's wrong but he's also infallible.

People go on forums to discuss things, then get upset if anyone dare question a media story being wrong, despite the fact that he's clearly wrong frequently, which is fine. LIke I said, if he had made that a blog post and said he believes this or he's guessing that, fine, that is all I've done. But he's gone on an official magazine that a hell of a lot more people read than f1 technical and made bold claims that are almost certainly incorrect..... again.
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
yet again...
Click to expand...

What do you mean 'yet again'? I haven't posted in this thread for months (September last year to be exact) let alone previously replying to your tirade of Craig Scarborough :confused:

But we get it, you don't believe him (i don't particular think it's an axial compressor but i'm not peeing my knickers over it) and he might be wrong. Until photos emerge of the back-end of the PU or Honda/McLaren themselves enlighten us, then it's all speculation and guess work.


drunkenmaster said:
...then get upset if anyone dare question a media story being wrong.
Click to expand...

I don't believe anyone here is getting 'upset' at Scarbs and his article potentially being incorrect nor that you're pointing it out. I think it's more to do with your continuous 400+ word replies to everyone where you endlessly go on repeating yourself over and over again.

Obviously, i could be wrong ;)
 
lolHelmutMarko

"It is difficult to prove, but I am sure that Mercedes helped Ferrari," he told the German magazine Sport Bild. "And we all know why."

Austrian Marko reportedly senses a political motive, and not just Mercedes' desire to halt suggestions it is damaging F1 by dominating so easily.

He might also be referring to the engine rules, with Ferrari having now joined Mercedes in backing the current turbo V6 era, even beyond 2017.

Sport Bild suggests Mercedes may even have slowed its own development programme over the winter, and recommended that Ferrari sign up its hybrid specialist Wolf Zimmermann.

"We expected an improvement," said Sauber engineer Giampaolo Dall'Ara, referring to Ferrari's 2015 engine, "but such great progress in such a short space of time is difficult to explain."
Click to expand...

http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns30646.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom