Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Remember williams is not that good a car, same as last year they didn't win untill the end with montoya who was a good champ car driver.

Here's another hurdle for williams they may not have BMW power next year

rumers are Sir Frank has already been talking to Cosworth.

Webber is good he wouldn't be there if he wasn't he will get his podium this year but he wont win a race.Thats my knoledge for the night.

  • Replies 310
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Webber is sitting alone in 6th position. People tend to forget that the F1 standings are based on consistant performances, rather than one or 2 wins a season with DNF's left right and center. Best example, 2003 when Raikkonen only had 1 win but was 2 points shy of the drivers championship crown.

It's no secret that Williams have a piss poor chassis. BMW are talking to Sauber for 06 because of their disatisfaction with Williams. Who would blame them?

It's only 5 races of 16 races and who knows??? Remember in 98 when EVERYBODY thought it was going to be a clean sweap for Mclaren, only to have a Ferrari comeback which went down to the wire?

God I sounds like an old man recalling these instances.. lol.

  • 2 weeks later...

Webber tonight!!!!! once again strong 1st qualifying session! but almost a second off kimi! looks like no chance of winning, but hopefully he gets the breakthrough and gets a podium tonight. Suppose we will see after the second qualifying session how he is really going. One of the best qualifyers in F1, if not the best.

Pos No Driver Team Laps Time/Retired Grid Points

1 9 Kimi Räikkönen McLaren-Mercedes 2:30.323

2 5 Fernando Alonso Renault 2:30.406

3 7 Mark Webber Williams-BMW 2:31.656

4 6 Giancarlo Fisichella Renault 2:32.100

5 16 Jarno Trulli Toyota 2:32.590

6 8 Nick Heidfeld Williams-BMW 2:32.883

7 14 David Coulthard Red Bull Racing 2:33.867

8 1 Michael Schumacher Ferrari 2:34.736

9 11 Jacques Villeneuve Sauber-Petronas 2:34.936

10 2 Rubens Barrichello Ferrari 2:34.983

11 12 Felipe Massa Sauber-Petronas 2:35.120

12 15 Vitantonio Liuzzi Red Bull Racing 2:37.152

13 20 Patrick Friesacher Minardi-Cosworth 2:40.810

14 21 Christijan Albers Minardi-Cosworth 2:42.206

15 18 Tiago Monteiro Jordan-Toyota 2:43.078

16 19 Narain Karthikeyan Jordan-Toyota 2:43.442

17 10 Juan Pablo Montoya McLaren-Mercedes 1:14.858

18 17 Ralf Schumacher Toyota

Pos     No     Driver   Team     Laps     Time/Retired   Grid     Points

           

1   9   Kimi Räikkönen  McLaren-Mercedes     2:30.323    

          2   5   Fernando Alonso  Renault     2:30.406    

          3   7   Mark Webber  Williams-BMW     2:31.656    

          4   6   Giancarlo Fisichella  Renault     2:32.100    

          5   16   Jarno Trulli  Toyota     2:32.590    

          6   8   Nick Heidfeld  Williams-BMW     2:32.883    

          7   14   David Coulthard  Red Bull Racing     2:33.867    

          8   1   Michael Schumacher  Ferrari     2:34.736    

          9   11   Jacques Villeneuve  Sauber-Petronas     2:34.936    

          10   2   Rubens Barrichello  Ferrari     2:34.983    

          11   12   Felipe Massa  Sauber-Petronas     2:35.120    

          12   15   Vitantonio Liuzzi  Red Bull Racing     2:37.152    

          13   20   Patrick Friesacher  Minardi-Cosworth     2:40.810    

          14   21   Christijan Albers  Minardi-Cosworth     2:42.206    

          15   18   Tiago Monteiro  Jordan-Toyota     2:43.078    

          16   19   Narain Karthikeyan  Jordan-Toyota     2:43.442    

          17   10   Juan Pablo Montoya  McLaren-Mercedes     1:14.858    

          18   17   Ralf Schumacher  Toyota

Webber will drop straight to 4th because the Renauts are so good out of corners and off the line.

Got the clinkers and JD ready for the race:) Coulthard to race well for points...who knows what Williams/Weber will get up to:)

Interesting thins is JV is starting to show a pair of heels to Massa after the bit of a spit he had with the team about them not listening to his setup/feedback. Now that the team isnt just using Massa's feedback JV seems to have found some pace, definitely more then Massa...wondering if there is anything in it, team politics being what they are you never have a hope of sussing out who is performing from who is weak sauce:)

Another shit start, how annoying. Any ways a good effort, shame about Heidfeld getting to the pits first, causing webber to finish third.

As for the 'Dubious' driving around corners kor'axis, i think Webber was in the right both times as Alonso was holding him up badly and Alonso made no effort to actually attempt to go 'around' the corner he cut through both times. It was inevitable.

Hopefully this is the breakthrough for both Williams and Mark to get more podiums and a 1st position in the not so distant future.

It was a good race as their was actually more then 1 pass in the race, the rules seem to be doing good things. but still not sure about them.

Good shit by Webber though!!

Paradizzle.

i'd say webber may have had a thing or 2 to say to the team boss after the last pitstop. he didn't seem to happy on the podium. would have been interesting if webber had gotten past Alonso sooner, lapping 3-4 seconds slower than the leader must of sucked, other than that it was a good race...

Personally I was really disappointed with how Webber drove.....I know Monaco is the worst place in the world to overtake, but seriously....

he was 4 sec per lap faster than the car in front but could not get past.

And his 2 efforts at overtaking at the swimming pool were in stark contrast to Heidfelds brilliant move at the same place. Its a miracle that Webber did not smack Alonso and put them both out.

He was out of luck with the pitstop tho, he should have come second.

And lets face it, it was Kimi's race, he could have lapped everyone on the course if he wanted to

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...