Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

merc had the same issues but changed their fuel mapping when asked to.

redbull didn't...

it's pretty clear, regardless of their measures being claimed to be more accurate or not.

I don't see the FIA conceeding and making their fuel meter supplier and themselves look like fools.

Red bull saw a hole it the regs and thought they could exploit it.

It was silly of them really to think the fia would back red bulls own readings and not the readings of the meter supplied but the fia.

Open and shut case methinks.

Sad thing is dan got screwed out of having his first podium at his home track.

I don't really understand all the focus ont he sound all over the interwebs. Sure they don't sound as good, no argument there, but that is very secondary to the spectacle of motorsport to me. There was way more to like than dislike about the new cars imo.

less aero grip = more driving

more grunt = more driving

tyres that actually work was a very welcome sight!

You can see the drivers are having to actually pedal the things again. That hasn't been the case for decades. It was awesome! That's what the World DRIVERS Championship should be about. Noise? meh - who cares...

Absolutely, but i don't think they sound bad at all although much is lost on TV.

If you can get to the track and park yourself at the entrance to a tight corner, the sound of everything winding down is awesome.

Was also very nice to only have to raise my voice to talk when they go past, not to mention the omission of ear buds.

Not as nice compared V8's or V10's on TV, but the new engines are more enjoyable trackside IMO

I'm still watching the aus gp coverage and I think it is much improved over last years coverage.

I really like mel McLaughlin, I hope she comes back next year. :)

no she is a bigot who blows everyone on channel 10 to get as much air time as she can.. Knows nothing at all about what she is covering and asks the dumbest remedial questions time and time again. Not even that good looking!

  • Like 1
no she is a bigot who blows everyone on channel 10 to get as much air time as she can.. Knows nothing at all about what she is covering and asks the dumbest remedial questions time and time again. Not even that good looking!

Wow dude you need to eat a cookie..

Interesting to read about Merc. But dont assume to much. ..quite possible that their data supported what the FIA instrumetn was telling them so turned it down... vs RBR who claim their data demonstrated it was wrong and didnt want to surrender even more power

also don't assume too much of what RBR is saying is true... according to RBR, everyone up and down pitlane was having issues with the meters all weekend. But only RBR refused to follow the FIA's directions...

The fact Nico just ran away from Dan doesn't suggest Ricciado had any extra power

How about the fact he was the fastest Renault by far?

Edited by hrd-hr30

no she is a bigot who blows everyone on channel 10 to get as much air time as she can.. Knows nothing at all about what she is covering and asks the dumbest remedial questions time and time again. Not even that good looking!

Your farked in the head!

...said with all the love in the world...but seems to be true based on your statements :)

f**k. Theres no point arguing, because noone on here will ever know if RBR were using a legal amount or twice the legal amount of fuel. The other teams had expressed concerns about it, now Porsche (who use the same sensors in one of their race cars) have said they have had issues with it as well

The hearing is set, the sensor looks questionable, but RBR ignored warnings from the FIA about it during the race. They might win the appeal, they might lose.

Noone here knows if the Mercedes is that far superior that even when using more fuel the RBR couldnt keep up

To me this argument is pointless

The issue isn't whether Red Bull had any extra power or not.

The issue isn't really even whether they exceeded the fuel flow limits or not.

The real issue is RBR chose not to follow the FIA's directions regarding fuel flow throughout the race as required under the rules (Every other team followed their instructions, btw). RBR decided to rely on their alternate measurements for fuel flow without following the process outlined in the rules. So regardless of whether their measurments were more accurate than the sensor or not, they broke the rules.

Clearly they are doing it to highlight the issue of the fuel flow sensors and get the sensors, or the method of monitoring changed. I don't think they can win the appeal, but they will probably get the rules changed regarding the fuel flow monitoring.

Edited by hrd-hr30

huh? who said anything about letting the teams decide themselves?

The FIA would still be monitoring in real time and telling the teams to apply offsets if required - just using a different method to monitor fuel flow. Which, by the way, is already in the regs as the backup method... So it is not a very big change to make. They already have all the procedures in place.

It's just RBR wanting to bring the issue of the questionable fuel sensors to a head IMO

Edited by hrd-hr30

Well back in the day (Mid eigthies) they had fuel limits with no boost or fuel flow limits. Which made Sunday nice and safe but less so on Friday/Saturday when it was basically a free for all. Not sure how they cap horsepower now (by limiting boost) but a fuel flow limit does that in no uncertain terms.

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 neglected to respond to this previously. Get it up to 100 psi, and then you'll be OK.
    • I agree with everything else, except (and I'm rethinking this as it wasn't setup how my brain first though) if the sensor is at the end of a hose which is how it has been recommended to isolate it from vibrations, then if that line had a small hole in, I could foresee potentially (not a fluid dynamic specialist) the ability for it to see a lower pressure at the sensor. But thinking through, said sensor was in the actual block, HOWEVER it was also the sensor itself that broke, so oil pressure may not have been fully reaching the sensor still. So I'm still in my same theory.   However, I 100% would be saying COOL THE OIL DOWN if it's at 125c. That would be an epic concern of mine.   Im now thinking as you did Brad that the knock detection is likely due to the bearings giving a bit more noise as pressure dropped away. Kinkstah, drop your oil, and get a sample of it (as you're draining it) and send it off for analysis.
    • I myself AM TOTALLY UNPREPARED TO BELIEVE that the load is higher on the track than on the dyno. If it is not happening on the dyno, I cannot see it happening on the track. The difference you are seeing is because it is hot on the track, and I am pretty sure your tuner is not belting the crap out of it on teh dyno when it starts to get hot. The only way that being hot on the track can lead to real ping, that I can think of, is if you are getting more oil (from mist in the inlet tract, or going up past the oil control rings) reducing the effective octane rating of the fuel and causing ping that way. Yeah, nah. Look at this graph which I will helpfully show you zoomed back in. As an engineer, I look at the difference in viscocity at (in your case, 125°C) and say "they're all the same number". Even though those lines are not completely collapsed down onto each other, the oil grades you are talking about (40, 50 and 60) are teh top three lines (150, 220 and 320) and as far as I am concerned, there is not enough difference between them at that temperature to be meaningful. The viscosity of 60 at 125°C is teh same as 40 at 100°C. You should not operate it under high load at high temperature. That is purely because the only way they can achieve their emissions numbers is with thin-arse oil in it, so they have to tell you to put thin oil in it for the street. They know that no-one can drive the car & engine hard enough on the street to reach the operating regime that demands the actual correct oil that the engine needs on the track. And so they tell you to put that oil in for the track. Find a way to get more air into it, or, more likely, out of it. Or add a water spray for when it's hot. Or something.   As to the leak --- a small leak that cannot cause near catastrophic volume loss in a few seconds cannot cause a low pressure condition in the engine. If the leak is large enough to drop oil pressure, then you will only get one or two shots at it before the sump is drained.
    • So..... it's going to be a heater hose or other coolant hose at the rear of the head/plenum. Or it's going to be one of the welch plugs on the back of the motor, which is a motor out thing to fix.
    • The oil pressure sensor for logging, does it happen to be the one that was slowly breaking out of the oil block? If it is,I would be ignoring your logs. You had a leak at the sensor which would mean it can't read accurately. It's a small hole at the sensor, and you had a small hole just before it, meaning you could have lost significant pressure reading.   As for brakes, if it's just fluid getting old, you won't necessarily end up with air sitting in the line. Bleed a shit tonne of fluid through so you effectively replace it and go again. Oh and, pay close attention to the pressure gauge while on track!
×
×
  • Create New...