Alfa Romeo Forums banner

181 - 200 of 464 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,334 Posts
You know, I do like video footage from that era, and I was smiling inside the first minute of the video...but not for reasons I was expecting.
What got me smiling was the OMG-why-didn't-I-think-of-that moment when I saw the mechanic pour oil into the engine with the pour-hole uppermost while holding the can....nice gentle pour....no glug-glug...no spill...and no wipe-up.
Doh! For 40+ years I've been doing it wrong...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,907 Posts
Some people just weren't raised right! ;-) I remember my dad teaching me that when teaching me how to fill our Coleman stove when. Coleman fuel still comes in cans just like that. Today they'd probably call Social Services on him for letting a 5 year old handle flammable fuel!

I think that's probably brake fluid since it's going in the front of the car. ATE Type 200 still comes in cans like that too come to think of it.

"First Time Out", Zandvoort 1967
Lotus 49
The new Cosworth DFV V8
The great Jim Clark.
Great footage and big names.
Look at those soft springs.
Look at no guard rails.
Look at people standing on the track.
This is the most interesting era of F1 for me with the rapid, radical technological innovations. First the monocoque chassis, then wings and finally "ground effects". One year on from this video the cars looked quite different and by 1970 were totally unrecognizable as being the same class of car.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,012 Posts
Interesting Monaco race. I knew the drivers couldn't overtake when following the safety car, but I didn't know a driver could overtake a place in the pits. I thought that no overtaking meant never when the safety car was out, but evidently all is fair in the pits.

The penalty incurred was for unsafe release, not passing per se. And, IMHO, the penalty should have been more than 5 seconds as, if they had collided, exposed pit workers could have been injured if not killed.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,757 Posts
Good to see Ricciardo spanking Hulkenburg as expected ... the gap will only increase as he gets further used to the team and they warm to him.
Pete
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
272 Posts
Great race, Hamilton deserved the win on the back of an amazing qualifying lap and defiant driving through the race.
Agree, but he might have done a little less whining about his tires. Not sure why, as one of the announcers said, the team didn't just tell him that he can win if he keeps going or finish fourth if he got new tires. Hamilton won the same was as Ricciardo did last year - go slow enough to save the tires and fast enough to keep the train behind him.

Mike
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Interesting comment from Franz Tost, saying that reducing F1 downforce levels would make it easier for cars to follow, harder to drive through the corners and increase braking distances to promote overtaking.

For me, this would make watching F1 much more fun, and I suspect it would take more driver skill to control the car when it is more likely to slide/drift. Plus, the significantly reduced wake would also make it easier for cars to pass.

Increasing aero downforce is a dead end practice. F1 is slowly beginning to realize that. Far too many aero devices hung on the cars now, including worrying about ground clearance height, etc. The cars have become pretty weird, with wings, fins, boards underneath, what the hell. I say strip all that cr*p off but keep the very safe body.
They’ve been saying this exact thing since I started watching F1 in the 90s. Maybe even longer, but I would have been too young to remember.

Every year they tweak the aero for more passing, and every year the racing is worse than before. I agree: just remove the bloody things.

But then you’d be eliminating valuable advertising space. Who else remembers when they elected to put grooves in the tires rather than reduce the advertising real estate?

Sad.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,757 Posts
They don't want to reduce the aero because the aero is why F1 is the fastest racing class.

It's similar to how the American's ended up with oval track racing, they wanted to be the fastest ... take that concept to the extreme and the only circuit shape you can have is an oval.


I do think too many think quality racing means lots of passing. I disagree, and this is why I struggle to enjoy a motorcycle race. In the case of motorcycles it is often way too easy to pass, and so passing happens constantly ... doesn't make the racing necessarily interesting. What is interesting, is the game of chess to ensure you are in the lead where the chequered flag is being waved. In some cases that means you want to come out of the last corner second NOT first.

One has to remember that there is a lot of skill involved in keeping an opponent behind you too. They are not just driving along, day dreaming. Their lines, acceleration and braking points have changed to ensure that the guy behind cannot pass them, even if it means lapping slower. So it is not the number of passes that make an interesting race, it is whether we actually have a battle for positions. It sounds like, thanks to Lewis' tyres we had that at Monaco, but usually Lewis finishes the race and has removed his overalls before the first non-Mercedes eventually putters over the line ... that is the main problem.

With this engine formula, only Mercedes' engineers thought outside of the box enough to create the most fantastic power train that maximised the potential of this engine formula. All other engine manufactures just put a traditional turbo on a v6 engine, then added energy capture and reuse, and because of the token system have been stuck with that [email protected] design since then, unable to copy Mercedes and completely split the turbo so the compressor side stays cool and is not affected by the exhaust side. Now I'm not up on all the rules, but if I was managing Ferrari, Renault or Honda, I would have scrapped my power train design (and designers?) and started a fresh with the Mercedes concept, even if it meant that for the next season the team had to suffer thousands of grid penalties because of the power train redesign.

I believe Mercedes have a large power advantage meaning they can concentrate on designing the rest of their car, run more wing, etc. Ferrari on the other hand are lagging behind everywhere while they struggle to squeeze 5 hp more out of their 1980's turbo concept engine with energy capture and reuse taped on. Hence why sometimes Ferrari appear to look good, but then in the race they kill their tyres ... they have had to dial down their aero settings ...

Now that this engine formula is nearing it's end, I do hope that 75% of the Ferrari effort is being put to designing the new power train, with a completely open mind (maybe time to hire a young engineering grad with wild ideas who is not constrained by previous power train designs he did). They are never going to beat Mercedes. Haven't got the engine and haven't got the right number 1 driver.
Pete
ps: I love Scuderia Ferrari, but ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,966 Posts
Agree, but he might have done a little less whining about his tires. Not sure why, as one of the announcers said, the team didn't just tell him that he can win if he keeps going or finish fourth if he got new tires. Hamilton won the same was as Ricciardo did last year - go slow enough to save the tires and fast enough to keep the train behind him.

Mike
It's worth reading the team's take on it:
https://www.pitpass.com/64781/Lewis-saved-us-admits-Wolff

And this doesn't strike me as a whiner's assessment of his own performance:
https://www.pitpass.com/64783/Average-Hamilton-warns-he-can-do-better
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,012 Posts
"What got me smiling was the OMG-why-didn't-I-think-of-that moment when I saw the mechanic pour oil into the engine with the pour-hole uppermost while holding the can....nice gentle pour....no glug-glug...no spill...and no wipe-up"

Lol, my father taught that technique to me when I was just a kid. Works for all liquids in cans with offset openings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,097 Posts
On the reduce downforce discussion further above, this is essentially what Indycar has done with the latest version of their spec chassis - way less downforce, no power steering, a lot of movement in the car, and a challenge to drive. Experience counts more now.

I completely understand F1's desire to be the fastest form of racing, and increased downforce is what's required to do that. But as someone mentioned, there are diminishing returns as you push this technology. You all remember the sucker cars from Brabham. If you essentially glue the car down to the asphalt, it can achieve ungodly cornering speeds, dependent only on lateral grip tire technology at that point I guess. You just steer it where you want to go, on the most efficient arcs. But then if something leaks or slips or breaks or blows, like in the side skirt era, all that momentum goes right into the fence and we're going to have increased heavy accidents.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,012 Posts
Well, I've read that the Montreal course does favor cars which are faster on the straight, as compared to most courses, thus I'm not surprised at the quals. That appears to be the only thing Ferrari has going for it right now.
 
181 - 200 of 464 Posts
Top