Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

And you have to say Nico has been doing the better job. Lewis has been messy a few times this year....Nico just fets on with it and never makes a mistake of consequence

yeah it was interesting hearing his radio comments as the issue unfolded, asking calmly for what to do... and then when the shit hit the fan he looked at the bigger picture and just wanted to limp around, most drivers so far get angry and just want a fix....

yeah it was interesting hearing his radio comments as the issue unfolded, asking calmly for what to do... and then when the shit hit the fan he looked at the bigger picture and just wanted to limp around, most drivers so far get angry and just want a fix....

Have to agree. Cant help but feel Lewis would have just said "come on guys, we can't have this" then had a winge after the race.

And you have to say Nico has been doing the better job. Lewis has been messy a few times this year....Nico just fets on with it and never makes a mistake of consequence

Despite having double the number of DNF's, Lewie still has 66.67% more race wins than Rosbergo

So I, respectfully, disagree with that assessment

Interesting to see the Merc power unit in more detail. I was of the belief that they were running a big single.

http://www.formula1.com/gallery/testing/2014/863.html

That photo confuses me. They do run a big single, its in the regulations:

A Formula One car’s power unit consists of a 1.6-litre turbocharged V6 engine which operates in conjunction with an Energy Recovery System (ERS). The engine must have six cylinders in a 90-degree formation, with two inlet and two exhaust valves per cylinder and a single turbocharger. They are rev-limited to 15,000rpm, have a fuel flow limit of 100 kilograms/hour and produce around 600bhp. They must also have a single tailpipe exhaust.

But seen as they have what appears to be the best engine at the moment, I wouldnt be suprised if they were putting out a display engine that isnt exactly what sits in the cars. At least it looks like its some sort of display section its in anyway.

Despite having double the number of DNF's, Lewie still has 66.67% more race wins than Rosbergo

So I, respectfully, disagree with that assessment

but the Canada retirement was due to Hamilton not having the awareness to identify early enough, and/or the mechanical sympathy to nurse the car home with the same issue Rosberg had... so Hamilton is responsible for that retirement.

Edited by hrd-hr30

fair cop maybe; his driving style prefers a little more rear brake bias, which shows up the marginal nature of the rear rotor thickness when the drag induced by ERS harvesting is taken away

consider if he'd finished third though, he'd be 11 points ahead rather than just 4 shy

Interesting to see the Merc power unit in more detail. I was of the belief that they were running a big single

they indeed do

the uniqueness of the Merc setup is that the compressor and turbine housings are at opposite ends of the engine with the connecting shaft running through the MGU-H motor in the center of the V, thereby giving a more optimal route for the intake pipework

Despite having double the number of DNF's, Lewie still has 66.67% more race wins than Rosbergo

So I, respectfully, disagree with that assessment

When he is on it he has done a good job. But when he has had his mech failures he has been behind Rosberg. When Rosbergs car failed he was in the lead. But thats only a small part of it.

The main reason for saying it as its not even a case of being out qualified by Rosberg, but more the point that he has thrown away 3 (?) qualifying sessions now by being a hack. I mean he has had woeful qualifying where as Rosberg has done everything needed from him.

As Harry pointed out...I will refrain from criticizing Hamilton for the retirement in Canada but I think its important to credit Rosberg with how he handled the situation and bagged a second place.

So just have to cross fingers that Lauda and Wolff let them continue to race each other

http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/166621.html

"Different teams have developed the technology to different extents, with Mercedes believed to have one of the most effective systems"

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...