Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The only limit on the new engines is basically fuel. They are only allowed to carry a certain amount of fuel and it means they will have to be pretty conservative with boost and power if they want to make it to the end of the race. Hopefully they will hot them up to serious power then turn them down for economy but at points of the race lean on it for more power and speed...strategies will be interesting

So its going to be a regularity run like this years races - just instead of tyres being the limiting factor it will be fuel. Or are they going to alternate between the two to spice the show up?

Spice is the right word. Because you wont know whether or not they are driving slowly to conserve fuel or to conserve their tyres. Imagine the tension, the excitement of the post race interview.

"So, Kimi, tell us about your race"

"It was shit."
"Was the tyres or fuel this time?"

"Tyres."

Unparalleled levels of awesomeness right there.

Spice is the right word. Because you wont know whether or not they are driving slowly to conserve fuel or to conserve their tyres. Imagine the tension, the excitement of the post race interview.

"So, Kimi, tell us about your race"

"It was shit."

"Was the tyres or fuel this time?"

"Tyres."

Unparalleled levels of awesomeness right there.

Sounds like a normal interview with Kimi? lol

Paddy Lowe will add his name to the Mercedes payroll next month after McLaren agreed to let him go early.

http://www.planetf1.com/news/3213/8724087/Lowe-To-Join-Merc-In-As-Technical-Exec

Although Bernie Ecclestone wouldn't be "surprised" if BMW returned to F1, the German company has denied plans.

"I would be surprised if we don't see BMW again," Ecclestone told City A.M. "I think they could come in.

"The amount of money they spent was not significant in the grand scheme of things. It makes sense for them to return."

BMW, though, insist they have no plans of making a comeback.

"I don't know with whom Bernie spoke," motorsport boss Jens Marquardt told Autosport. "We are right on top of our current programme, namely DTM.

"In GT sports cars at the Nordschleife and in ALMS as well as customer sport programmes we are posting super results.

"We have absolutely no intention of looking at other categories. We made a conscious decision to withdraw from Formula 1.

"We orientated ourselves around that which our customers recognise as being BMW. There is no reason to alter this concept. It is currently running very well."

http://www.planetf1.com/driver/18227/8724333/BMW-have-no-intention-of-returning

all problems will be solved when the FIA adopts my 'Drive it like you stole it' F1 regs

Nankang will be the sole tyre supplier. Tyres will be 16" wide at the front and 20" at the rear. Treadwear ratings will be 400, 500 and 600

Ground effects is back

Refuelling reinstated. Each car will be allocated 300L per race. Cars will have 1 second added to their race classification for every 10L of fuel remaining in the hopper at the finish

they just need to get in front and control the race from there

hold up guys, we're dealing with a master strategist here! :D jks

qualifying well here matters more than at any other track

hell, any passing will likely be only of the pit-lane 'undercut' or blue flag variety

P1 Times
01 Nico Rosberg Mercedes 1:16.195 30 laps
02 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1:16.282 +0.087s 26 laps
03 Romain Grosjean Lotus 1:16.380 +0.185s 20 laps
04 Felipe Massa Ferrari 1:16.394 +0.199s 22 laps
05 Lewis Hamilton Mercedes 1:16.469 +0.274s 27 laps
06 Pastor Maldonado Williams 1:16.993 +0.798s 26 laps
07 Mark Webber Red Bull 1:17.020 +0.825s 26 laps
08 Jenson Button McLaren 1:17.129 +0.934s 28 laps
09 Sergio Perez McLaren 1:17.378 +1.183s 24 laps
10 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:17.380 +1.185s 22 laps
11 Kimi Raikkonen Lotus 1:17.509 +1.314s 25 laps
12 Paul di Resta Force 1:17.548 +1.353s 26 laps
13 Adrian Sutil Force 1:17.625 +1.430s 20 laps
14 Nico Hulkenberg Sauber 1:18.193 +1.998s 25 laps
15 Jean-Eric Vergne Toro Rosso 1:18.454 +2.259s 24 laps
16 Esteban Gutierrez Sauber 1:8.754 +2.559s 27 laps
17 Valtteri Bottas Williams 1:18.830 +2.635s 27 laps
18 Daniel Ricciardo Toro Rosso 1:19.067 +2.872s 24 laps
19 Giedo van der Garde Caterham 1:19.203 +3.008s 20 laps
20 Charles Pic Caterham 1:19.438 +3.243s 27 laps
21 Jules Bianchi Marussia 1:19.773 +3.578s 19 laps
22 Max Chilton Marussia 1:20.225 +4.030s 20 laps

http://www.planetf1.com/news/3213/8729364/Prac-One

P2 Times
01 Nico Rosberg Mercedes 1:14.759 45 laps
02 Lewis Hamilton Mercedes 1:15.077 +0.318s 50 laps
03 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1:15.196 +0.437s 37 laps
04 Felipe Massa Ferrari 1:15.278 +0.519s 38 laps
05 Mark Webber Red Bull 1:15.404 +0.645s 41 laps
06 Kimi Raikkonen Lotus 1:5.511 +0.752s 38 laps
07 Romain Grosjean Lotus 1:15.718 +0.959s 10 laps
08 Jenson Button McLaren 1:15.959 +1.200s 39 laps
09 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1:16.014 +1.255s 32 laps
10 Paul di Resta Force India 1:16.046 +1.287s 42 laps
11 Adrian Sutil Force India 1:16.349 +1.590s 43 laps
12 Sergio Perez McLaren 1:16.434 +1.675s 40 laps
13 Nico Hulkenberg Sauber 1:16.823 +2.064s 42 laps
14 Pastor Maldonado Williams 1:16.857 +2.098s 40 laps
15 Esteban Gutierrez Sauber 1:16.935 +2.176s 44 laps
16 Daniel Ricciardo Toro Rosso 1:17.145 +2.386s 37 laps
17 Jean-Eric Vergne Toro Rosso 1:17.184 +2.425s 42 laps
18 Valtteri Bottas Williams 1:17.264 +2.505s 46 laps
19 Jules Bianchi Marussia 1:17.892 +3.133s 40 laps
20 Charles Pic Caterham 1:18.212 +3.453s 43 laps
21 Max Chilton Marussia 1:18.784 +4.025s 40 laps
22 Giedo van der Garde Caterham 1:19.031 +4.272s 30 laps

http://www.planetf1.com/news/3213/8729948/Prac-Two

I suspect the Mercs may manage to get passed here too - look how bad they were under brakes last race, particualrly in the downhill braking area... If they suck that bad here, they will be passed into the first chicane after the tunnel. And if they hurt their rear tyres too badly, they might find themselves getting passed on the pit straight or even after the first chicane.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...