Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Oh Bottas, youuuuu fuucked up; Or was it because you drove so hard in the first two sectors that the rear tyres weren't there at the end?

I wanted so bad for him to upset the Mercedes party. Think if he led from the start he might be able to hold it till the end

  • Like 1

There's another story link at the bottom of that story that just shows how they are playing up Schumacher's improvement. The other story says "he'll soon be able to lead a normal life" despite the fact that he's still unable to move or speak, and his son says in the first story that he's only "waking up" very slowly.

So much for any of the other teams catching them up. They were soooo dominant today. The fact that Rosberg was quicker than Williams, Dan etc on hammered tyres...those things rarely show their true speed.

Seems very ominous for next year too. They only have to tweak this years car to remain dominate whilst RBR, McLaren and Ferrari need to find 1.5-2.0 seconds over Xmas :(

Oh well.

One thing about last nights race was the joke that the FIA call track limits, Vettel in his usual great form driving straight off the track at most corner exits.

Other teams will match the configuration of the Mercs next year. Will hopefully be a fairer race, only time will tell.

Monaco really showed how fast they were as well. Watching the Mercs leave RBR in their dust on the straights. No wonder they are wining everything with the speed those things have.

So much for any of the other teams catching them up. They were soooo dominant today. The fact that Rosberg was quicker than Williams, Dan etc on hammered tyres...those things rarely show their true speed.

Seems very ominous for next year too. They only have to tweak this years car to remain dominate whilst RBR, McLaren and Ferrari need to find 1.5-2.0 seconds over Xmas :(

Oh well.

One thing about last nights race was the joke that the FIA call track limits, Vettel in his usual great form driving straight off the track at most corner exits.

if they aren't enforcing track limits, it makes sense to exploit it to your advantage.

I think the fact everyone had to conserve fuel helped Rosberg. If others had fuel to burn along with their fresher rubber, it might have been a different story. But yeah, Hamilton just coasting around setting fastest laps was a little bit ridiculous! And Mercedes engines top 5 places.

Unfortunately it seems Rosberg is the one folding under the WDC pressure at critical moments lately. As much as I hate to say it, Hamilton seems to have his number now.

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...