Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Why is this still unresolved? Almost at two weeks later ffs.

It's not unresolved. It's just that RBR didn't like the resolution.

But RBR have been testing meters under FIA observation in the meantime, and have "acquired a number of new fuel flow sensors and will work with the FIA during the (Malaysian GP) weekend to find one that is accurate to the satisfaction of both sides."

They're less likely to do it again this weekend because they have no real hope of keeping the Mercedes powered cars behind them on these long straights unless Renault has made big gains in their engine POWER spec - oops did I say power? I meant reliability - because those are the only changes allowed now, for improved reliability. yeah right... whereas in Aus it was worth the risk because it is a difficult track to pass on.

Edited by hrd-hr30

But RBR have been testing meters under FIA observation in the meantime, and have "acquired a number of new fuel flow sensors and will work with the FIA during the (Malaysian GP) weekend to find one that is accurate to the satisfaction of both sides."

Slightly worrying that the sensors need to be tested on the car to find an accurate/acceptable one.

Slightly worrying that the sensors need to be tested on the car to find an accurate/acceptable one.

They are all tested then an offset applied (eg its 2% over reading or under reading or whatever) and then used. It is easy to say it should be perfect but nothing in this world ever is.

They are all tested then an offset applied (eg its 2% over reading or under reading or whatever) and then used. It is easy to say it should be perfect but nothing in this world ever is.

The sensor manufacturer says "52 per cent of its meters are with a 0.1 per cent accuracy reading, with 92 per cent within 0.25 per cent". As you say the offset is applied to level them out, so all cars can use the same mass fuel flow.

"the teams have accepted that when they are alerted to the possibility the sensor could exceed the 100kg per hour rate at peak flow, irrespective of what their own data says, they have to peg back their rate slightly to ensure there is no breach of the rules." Well, every team except one that decided to ignore it and the FIA when fighting for position with a more powerful car...

(quotes from http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/112973)

Edited by hrd-hr30

Well it does because if it was a bullshit number you can understand why they reacted in the way they did.

EG:
FIA: "We now want you to reduce your fuel flow by 5%"

RB: "It was 0.2% on Friday your numbers are clearly rubbish. Get stuffed."

FIA: "Resistance is useless" etc etc*

* Yes I am likening the FIA to the Vogons.

Edited by djr81

Well it does because if it was a bullshit number you can understand why they reacted in the way they did.

EG:

FIA: "We now want you to reduce your fuel flow by 5%"

RB: "It was 0.2% on Friday your numbers are clearly rubbish. Get stuffed."

FIA: "Resistance is useless" etc etc*

* Yes I am likening the FIA to the Vogons.

everyone was in the same boat. Other teams adjusted their fuel flow during the race according to what the FIA were seeing from the sensor. Some even chose to run well below the sensor indicated maximum flow to make sure they didn't exceed it. Only one car refused to play by the same rules and the same calibrated/corrected meter everyone was using. .

Edited by hrd-hr30

Half expect RBR are willing to fall on the sword early and bring the BS out in the open. I hear what you are saying about others obeying...but for all we know RBR may have been the worst example being asked to forfeit 4% power vs lesser amounts for others cars.

It matters little, the fact that many cars were all winding back performance, likely to all differing levels then why even have qualifying or practice sessions. Just have a raffle and fit random flow meters to the cars and watch them jockey for position in a race as the FIA tell them to slow down or allow them to speed up all on different levels ...retarded.

I am no fan of RBR...but good on them for busing balls over this now and hopefully we will avoid the farce of inaccurate instruments hurting a percentage of th efields performance over a race weekend, because....lotter dip of erroneous sensors says so

  • Like 2

Kimi has made a great improvement in the Ferrari. Mercedes having tyre wear worries

Might be an interesting weekend after all

yeah looks like it was more than just the new braking system....

but it sounded like he was having tyre issues on the long run too wasnt he?

hopefully the ferraris can take it to the mercs!!!

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

    • Has equal chance of cleaning an AFM and f**king an AFM. I think you can work out what happened. When the Hitachi ECU sees the AFM die and goes into the associated limp mode, then it will start and run just fine, because it ignores the AFM and just runs on idle maps that will do what it needs to get it going. But there is no proper load signal, so that's about all it can do. My suggestion? If you don't want to go full aftermaket ECU, then get some R35 GTR AFM cards and some housings to put them in, in the stock location, and Nistune the ECU. Better to do a good upgrade than just replace shitty 40 year old tech with the same 40 year old tech.
    • So my car was recently having trouble starting on initial crank, I would need to feather the gas for it to start up but besides that it would start and run fine. So I clicked the idle air control valve (with throttle body cleaner) and cleaned the MAF sensors (with MAF cleaner). The start up issue was fixed and now the car turns over without the assist of the throttle, but the car is in limp mode and wont rev past 2.5k RPM. From what I understand the IACV would not put the car in limp mode, so I am to believe it is the MAF sensors, but it was running fine before and now I cant get it out of limp mode. I cleaned the MAF made sure the o rings were seated properly. Made sure the cables were plugged in properly, the cables also both read the same voltage. Does anybody know why this is or what could be causing this or how to get it out of limp mode?
    • Ooo I might actually come and bring the kids, however will leave the shit box home and take the daily
    • Thanks. Yeah I realised that there's no way I'd be able to cover the holes with the filler, it would just fall through. Thanks again @GTSBoy!
    • That was the reason I asked. If you were going to be fully bodge spec, then that type of filler is the extreme bodge way to fill a large gap. But seeing as you're going to use glass sheet, I would only use that fibre reinforced filler if there are places that need a "bit more" after you've finished laying in the sheet. Which, ideally, you wouldn't. You might use a blob of it underneath the sheet, if you need to provide some support from under to keep the level of your sheet repair up as high as it needs to be, to minimise the amount of filler you need on top. Even though you're going bodge spec here, using glass instead of metal, the same rules apply wrt not having half inch deep filler on the top of the repair. Thick filler always ends up shitting the bed earlier than thin filler.
×
×
  • Create New...