Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Biggest surprise or disappointment of the season so far?
58 views
Skip to first unread message
XYXPDQ
Aug 3, 2022, 1:03:36 PM8/3/22
to
Your thoughts on the '22 F1 season at the summer break?
Mark Jackson
Aug 3, 2022, 2:00:03 PM8/3/22
to
On 8/3/2022 1:03 PM, XYXPDQ wrote:
> Your thoughts on the '22 F1 season at the summer break?
Fumblerrari.
> Your thoughts on the '22 F1 season at the summer break?
And I don't even like them.
--
Mark Jackson - https://mark-jackson.online/
There's no nondestructive test
for indestructibility. - Randall Munroe
Darryl Johnson
Aug 3, 2022, 2:15:16 PM8/3/22
to
On 2022-08-03 1:03 PM, XYXPDQ wrote:
> Your thoughts on the '22 F1 season at the summer break?
To me, the issues with "porpoising". And how some teams had few issues
> Your thoughts on the '22 F1 season at the summer break?
and others had severe issues. Not only did the issue itself surprise me,
but it has had a significant effect on the competitiveness, primarily
with Mercedes.
XYXPDQ
Aug 4, 2022, 2:06:33 PM8/4/22
to
For me the happy surprise is that the dart throwers who run F1 aero rules actually produced a package that lets cars race. Compare to the last package where staying close to a car ahead would ruin the trailing cars front tires and/or overheat the breaks.
On the team level Mercs failure to show up with a front row car is bewildering. And not just the bouncing, this years engine seems down on power compared to Red Bull and Ferrari. Most fans were looking forward to a rematch between Lewis and Max and that's just not happening. It's a good thing Ferrari has finally recovered or the WCC and WDC would already be completely over.
On the team level Mercs failure to show up with a front row car is bewildering. And not just the bouncing, this years engine seems down on power compared to Red Bull and Ferrari. Most fans were looking forward to a rematch between Lewis and Max and that's just not happening. It's a good thing Ferrari has finally recovered or the WCC and WDC would already be completely over.
~misfit~
Aug 4, 2022, 7:56:46 PM8/4/22
to
On 5/08/2022 6:06 am, XYXPDQ wrote:
> For me the happy surprise is that the dart throwers who run F1 aero rules actually produced a package that lets cars race. Compare to the last package where staying close to a car ahead would ruin the trailing cars front tires and/or overheat the breaks.
Not a complete surprise as Ross Brawn had a bit to do with that.
> For me the happy surprise is that the dart throwers who run F1 aero rules actually produced a package that lets cars race. Compare to the last package where staying close to a car ahead would ruin the trailing cars front tires and/or overheat the breaks.
> On the team level Mercs failure to show up with a front row car is bewildering. And not just the bouncing, this years engine seems down on power compared to Red Bull and Ferrari.
supposed to be sorted before Spa now the 'grey area' has been defined a little more).
Also, knowing the ICE development is frozen and modifications are only allowed for reliability
purposes for the next few years it seems Ferrari (and to a lesser extent RBR) have deliberately
gone with a power unit that delivers more power but has a tendency to self-destruct. That way
they've got power to match Mercedes for now and will be allowed to continue to develop their ICE in
the name of reliability.
Mercedes went conservative with the PU as they were already good on power and they didn't bend the
aero rules.
> Most fans were looking forward to a rematch between Lewis and Max and that's just not happening. It's a good thing Ferrari has finally recovered or the WCC and WDC would already be completely over.
penalties - and are likely to be taking more after the summer break. Add to that the fact that they
(along with RBR) resisted the new floor flexing rules that are coming in and maybe they're going to
be slower too in the races that they finish.
--
Shaun.
"Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
in the DSM"
David Melville
This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
Bigbird
Aug 5, 2022, 6:27:00 AM8/5/22
to
XYXPDQ wrote:
> Your thoughts on the '22 F1 season at the summer break?
For both categories; Porpoising
> Your thoughts on the '22 F1 season at the summer break?
Also disappointing Ferrari incompetence.
Flipside; more close racing.
--
Bozo Bin
Alan Baker
Texasgate
D Munz
Aug 8, 2022, 8:41:26 AM8/8/22
to
On Thursday, August 4, 2022 at 6:56:46 PM UTC-5, ~misfit~ wrote:
<snip>
> --
> Shaun.
Interesting take. Do you really think the wonks said "let's push the envelope on the engine and we can take advantage of a few "kablamohs" to keep developing the engine for the future..."?
I can almost see that level of Machiavellian intrigue at RBR but I'm not sure Ferrari is, I'll say, that good at forward thinking these days.
FWIW
DLM
<snip>
> Also, knowing the ICE development is frozen and modifications are only allowed for reliability
> purposes for the next few years it seems Ferrari (and to a lesser extent RBR) have deliberately
> gone with a power unit that delivers more power but has a tendency to self-destruct. That way
> they've got power to match Mercedes for now and will be allowed to continue to develop their ICE in
> the name of reliability.
<snip>
> purposes for the next few years it seems Ferrari (and to a lesser extent RBR) have deliberately
> gone with a power unit that delivers more power but has a tendency to self-destruct. That way
> they've got power to match Mercedes for now and will be allowed to continue to develop their ICE in
> the name of reliability.
> --
> Shaun.
Interesting take. Do you really think the wonks said "let's push the envelope on the engine and we can take advantage of a few "kablamohs" to keep developing the engine for the future..."?
I can almost see that level of Machiavellian intrigue at RBR but I'm not sure Ferrari is, I'll say, that good at forward thinking these days.
FWIW
DLM
Alan
Aug 8, 2022, 3:00:47 PM8/8/22
to
On 2022-08-04 16:56, ~misfit~ wrote:
> On 5/08/2022 6:06 am, XYXPDQ wrote:
>> For me the happy surprise is that the dart throwers who run F1 aero
>> rules actually produced a package that lets cars race. Compare to
>> the last package where staying close to a car ahead would ruin the
>> trailing cars front tires and/or overheat the breaks.
>
> Not a complete surprise as Ross Brawn had a bit to do with that.
>
>> On the team level Mercs failure to show up with a front row car is
>> bewildering. And not just the bouncing, this years engine seems down
>> on power compared to Red Bull and Ferrari.
>
> Not so bewildering when you consider the flexi-floor that both RBR and
> Ferrari have (that's supposed to be sorted before Spa now the 'grey
> area' has been defined a little more).
>
> Also, knowing the ICE development is frozen and modifications are only
> allowed for reliability purposes for the next few years it seems Ferrari
> (and to a lesser extent RBR) have deliberately gone with a power unit
> that delivers more power but has a tendency to self-destruct. That way
> they've got power to match Mercedes for now and will be allowed to
> continue to develop their ICE in the name of reliability.
>
> Mercedes went conservative with the PU as they were already good on
> power and they didn't bend the aero rules.
Neither Ferrari nor Red Bull "bent" the rules.
> On 5/08/2022 6:06 am, XYXPDQ wrote:
>> For me the happy surprise is that the dart throwers who run F1 aero
>> rules actually produced a package that lets cars race. Compare to
>> the last package where staying close to a car ahead would ruin the
>> trailing cars front tires and/or overheat the breaks.
>
> Not a complete surprise as Ross Brawn had a bit to do with that.
>
>> On the team level Mercs failure to show up with a front row car is
>> bewildering. And not just the bouncing, this years engine seems down
>> on power compared to Red Bull and Ferrari.
>
> Not so bewildering when you consider the flexi-floor that both RBR and
> Ferrari have (that's supposed to be sorted before Spa now the 'grey
> area' has been defined a little more).
>
> Also, knowing the ICE development is frozen and modifications are only
> allowed for reliability purposes for the next few years it seems Ferrari
> (and to a lesser extent RBR) have deliberately gone with a power unit
> that delivers more power but has a tendency to self-destruct. That way
> they've got power to match Mercedes for now and will be allowed to
> continue to develop their ICE in the name of reliability.
>
> Mercedes went conservative with the PU as they were already good on
> power and they didn't bend the aero rules.
They built a car that passed the test the rules mandated.
Period.
Alan
Aug 8, 2022, 5:43:48 PM8/8/22
to
On 2022-08-08 13:12, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <tcrmgt$10luo$3...@dont-email.me>,
> understood and respected the intention of the rules whereas ....
"respect the intention of the rules"?
What nonsense.
EVERY team tries to build a car that utilizes every loophole it can
think of. Period.
>
> If merc had been the only team to do this, it would have been stopped
> months ago. Remind me again how many mm lewis's rear wing was over by?
It was over by enough that it failed the test.
THAT is failing to obey the rules.
If it had passed the test by a micrometer, would you argue that it was
against the "intention of the rules"?
> In article <tcrmgt$10luo$3...@dont-email.me>,
>
>> Neither Ferrari nor Red Bull "bent" the rules.
>
>> They built a car that passed the test the rules mandated.
>
> So why didn't mercedes do the same? They didn't because they
>> Neither Ferrari nor Red Bull "bent" the rules.
>
>> They built a car that passed the test the rules mandated.
>
> understood and respected the intention of the rules whereas ....
"respect the intention of the rules"?
What nonsense.
EVERY team tries to build a car that utilizes every loophole it can
think of. Period.
>
> If merc had been the only team to do this, it would have been stopped
> months ago. Remind me again how many mm lewis's rear wing was over by?
It was over by enough that it failed the test.
THAT is failing to obey the rules.
If it had passed the test by a micrometer, would you argue that it was
against the "intention of the rules"?
~misfit~
Aug 8, 2022, 7:40:30 PM8/8/22
to
doubt they wanted to stay that way for three more years.
It just makes sense to work on power output while you can and then work on reliability later (when
you still can).
When was the last time you saw an ICE self-destruct in F1 like Sainz' did at Austria? It was a true
old-school 'wet bits flying around' engine blow up. <https://youtu.be/XO3qiLxuFJg> (The in-race
replay Sky did of it showed it better than this video does.)
Alan
Aug 9, 2022, 10:50:59 AM8/9/22
to
On 2022-08-09 01:11, Bob Latham wrote:
> In article <tcs02i$11kh5$1...@dont-email.me>,
Probably.
If teams didn't miss things that others teams did not, all 10 designs
would look identical.
>
>>> If merc had been the only team to do this, it would have been
>>> stopped months ago. Remind me again how many mm lewis's rear wing
>>> was over by?
>
>> It was over by enough that it failed the test.
>
> Yes, by a tiny amount which clearly had no real effect and was
> obviously a mistake.
It's failing to follow the rules.
>
>> THAT is failing to obey the rules.
>
> Had it been Ferrari or red bull they would have been told to get it
> fixed by the summer break or in a few races time. As we've seen.
Example please.
>
>> If it had passed the test by a micrometer, would you argue that it
>> was against the "intention of the rules"?
>
> Now who's talking nonsense.
>
> It became obvious to me in Spa 2008 that officials had every
> intention of stopping Hamilton if they could trump up charges to
> justify it. The only time I've ever seen rules made on the fly to
> cheat someone of their points. He did give back the place and drop
> back so must have been slower at that time. No advantage.
Sorry, but a missed decision doesn't change the fact that Hamilton's car
really was non-compliant in the incident we were discussing.
>
> Then the extremely harsh wing judgement and again I can't think of
> anything equivalent for any other driver.
So?
>
> Then the end of last year which for me brought F1 into disgrace and
> TV commentators shown to be "on side". Rules ignored to get Hamilton,
> who is the current world champion.
>
> I'm sure there were many more petty, vindictive things done against
> Hamilton we don't even know about - yet.
>
> To deny that hamilton is not being treated differently is
> disingenuous at best.
>
> This from a guy that isn't a Hamilton fan, I'd prefer George or Lando
> myself as they don't wear clown clothes or support nasty communist,
> corrupt organisations.
<yawn>
> In article <tcs02i$11kh5$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-08-08 13:12, Bob Latham wrote:
>>> In article <tcrmgt$10luo$3...@dont-email.me>,
>>>
>>>> Neither Ferrari nor Red Bull "bent" the rules.
>>>
>>>> They built a car that passed the test the rules mandated.
>>>
>>> So why didn't mercedes do the same? They didn't because they
>>> understood and respected the intention of the rules whereas ....
>
>> "respect the intention of the rules"?
>
>> What nonsense.
>
>> EVERY team tries to build a car that utilizes every loophole it can
>> think of. Period.
>
> Oh I see and merc were to stupid to spot that "loophole" I suppose?
>> On 2022-08-08 13:12, Bob Latham wrote:
>>> In article <tcrmgt$10luo$3...@dont-email.me>,
>>>
>>>> Neither Ferrari nor Red Bull "bent" the rules.
>>>
>>>> They built a car that passed the test the rules mandated.
>>>
>>> So why didn't mercedes do the same? They didn't because they
>>> understood and respected the intention of the rules whereas ....
>
>> "respect the intention of the rules"?
>
>> What nonsense.
>
>> EVERY team tries to build a car that utilizes every loophole it can
>> think of. Period.
>
Probably.
If teams didn't miss things that others teams did not, all 10 designs
would look identical.
>
>>> If merc had been the only team to do this, it would have been
>>> stopped months ago. Remind me again how many mm lewis's rear wing
>>> was over by?
>
>> It was over by enough that it failed the test.
>
> obviously a mistake.
It's failing to follow the rules.
>
>> THAT is failing to obey the rules.
>
> fixed by the summer break or in a few races time. As we've seen.
Example please.
>
>> If it had passed the test by a micrometer, would you argue that it
>> was against the "intention of the rules"?
>
>
> It became obvious to me in Spa 2008 that officials had every
> intention of stopping Hamilton if they could trump up charges to
> justify it. The only time I've ever seen rules made on the fly to
> cheat someone of their points. He did give back the place and drop
> back so must have been slower at that time. No advantage.
Sorry, but a missed decision doesn't change the fact that Hamilton's car
really was non-compliant in the incident we were discussing.
>
> Then the extremely harsh wing judgement and again I can't think of
> anything equivalent for any other driver.
So?
>
> Then the end of last year which for me brought F1 into disgrace and
> TV commentators shown to be "on side". Rules ignored to get Hamilton,
> who is the current world champion.
>
> I'm sure there were many more petty, vindictive things done against
> Hamilton we don't even know about - yet.
>
> To deny that hamilton is not being treated differently is
> disingenuous at best.
>
> This from a guy that isn't a Hamilton fan, I'd prefer George or Lando
> myself as they don't wear clown clothes or support nasty communist,
> corrupt organisations.
<yawn>
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
ldpshddtti
Aug 31, 2022, 4:54:06 AM8/31/22
to
Probably Mercedes. I did not expect them to drop the ball this hard in
2022.
--
2022.
--
0 new messages