Quote from [RCG]Boosted :

now that clearly was dominated by one song...

Yea, the worst one.

The number of Porsches in my home town probably increased 10 fold when the Cayenne came out, the wealthy soccer moms went nuts for them. They loved the idea of a 'sporty' Porsche that had 4WD and enough weight to make sure that they could always barge their way into your lane.

Simply, Porsche has finally expanded beyond the sports car market.

The WCC has it even worse than the WDC. If a team goes 1-2 at Abu Dhabi, that's 86 points, equivalent to 14% of Red Bull's 596 points this year.

Posted this over in the WEC thread but I'll dump it here too because it applies.

Quote :

Interesting idea pertaining to Ferrari...

With the FIA planning to place a budget cap on F1 teams, Ferrari could potentially divert their excess funds to a WEC effort. This effort uses and develops an engine built as close to F1 spec as possible (they said they wanted to use a derivative anyway). Ferrari can then take the WEC engine development and dump it back into the F1 car, allowing them to work on the engine without billing it to their limited budget.

edit: Maths, with many assumptions.

Quote :

So I was looking around Reddit earlier and someone mentioned that Ferrari would be in full support of giving double points to Abu Dhabi because any extra exposure for the track is extra exposure for Ferrari World. In all honesty, probably true but only because it's a good marketing decision. Cheeky, but the exact cleverness you would expect from Ferrari.

Then I thought about the budget cap and how Ferrari must certainly be adamantly opposed to it. Maybe, they aren't opposed though. Maybe, thanks to the WEC, they have already found a loophole. Indeed, I think they have.

Assume Ferrari has a budget of £250 million ($411 million), a fortune that is actually less than their known 2003 budget. Lets say the FIA set a budget cap of £120 million ($147 million), massive compared to the £25 million ($41 million) car planned in 2009. This leaves Ferrari with £130 million ($214 million) to spend on a rumored WEC effort. For reference, Audi is estimated to spend between £125-£180 million ($205-296 million). So Ferrari could easily fund a decent WEC effort with their leftover F1 budget.

Here's where the the fun begins. Ferrari said they want to run their WEC effort on a F1 derived engine. So, what if they use and develop a F1 engine (as close as they can get, at least) like they did with the 333SP? Well, Ferrari develops that as-close-to-F1 engine in the WEC, then shares all their development with the F1 team, free of charge. Now the F1 team has millions of dollars worth of engine development, but not one cent of it is on their budget. The top teams currently spend roughly £79 million ($150 million) on engine development each year. This means Ferrari could operate on a budget that would easily be over 60% of their original budget (my maths say this could be as much as 80% if Ferrari continued to spend £79 million, but this would lead to reduced development on the rest of the WEC car). Compare that to the 52% the FIA rules specified. As an added bonus, not one other team in F1 has a WEC effort (and maybe 2 or 3 could ever afford it), so Ferrari is left as the only team able to use this loophole.

It's all crazy and based on many assumptions, I know, but I find it hard to believe this hasn't crossed their minds in Maranello.

Last edited by Rappa Z, Tue 10 Dec 2013, 07:22.

Interesting idea pertaining to Ferrari...

With the FIA planning to place a budget cap on F1 teams, Ferrari could potentially divert their excess funds to a WEC effort. This effort uses and develops an engine built as close to F1 spec as possible (they said they wanted to use a derivative anyway). Ferrari can then take the WEC engine development and dump it back into the F1 car, allowing them to work on the engine without billing it to their limited budget.

edit: Here's some basic assumptions maths I did.

Quote :

So I was looking around Reddit earlier and someone mentioned that Ferrari would be in full support of giving double points to Abu Dhabi because any extra exposure for the track is extra exposure for Ferrari World. In all honesty, probably true but only because it's a good marketing decision. Cheeky, but the exact cleverness you would expect from Ferrari.

Then I thought about the budget cap and how Ferrari must certainly be adamantly opposed to it. Maybe, they aren't opposed though. Maybe, thanks to the WEC, they have already found a loophole. Indeed, I think they have.

Assume Ferrari has a budget of £250 million ($411 million), a fortune that is actually less than their known 2003 budget. Lets say the FIA set a budget cap of £120 million ($147 million), massive compared to the £25 million ($41 million) car planned in 2009. This leaves Ferrari with £130 million ($214 million) to spend on a rumored WEC effort. For reference, Audi is estimated to spend between £125-£180 million ($205-296 million). So Ferrari could easily fund a decent WEC effort with their leftover F1 budget.

Here's where the the fun begins. Ferrari said they want to run their WEC effort on a F1 derived engine. So, what if they use and develop a F1 engine (as close as they can get, at least) like they did with the 333SP? Well, Ferrari develops that as-close-to-F1 engine in the WEC, then shares all their development with the F1 team, free of charge. Now the F1 team has millions of dollars worth of engine development, but not one cent of it is on their budget. The top teams currently spend roughly £79 million ($150 million) on engine development each year. This means Ferrari could operate on a budget that would easily be over 60% of their original budget (my maths say this could be as much as 80% if Ferrari continued to spend £79 million, but this would lead to reduced development on the rest of the WEC car). Compare that to the 52% the FIA rules specified. As an added bonus, not one other team in F1 has a WEC effort (and maybe 2 or 3 could ever afford it), so Ferrari is left as the only team able to use this loophole.

It's all crazy and based on many assumptions, I know, but I find it hard to believe this hasn't crossed their minds in Maranello.

Last edited by Rappa Z, Tue 10 Dec 2013, 07:22.

They needed a close up of his face for the money shot.

I really don't think it would be that bad either, considering other series do it, if they implemented it right.

Like, it would make sense to do the 'crown jewel' races (Silverstone, Spa, Monza, Monaco, maybe season ender), because those are the real prestigious events. Only problem is, people would complain that they are all European races.

So, maybe one double payout per continent would be better (Melbourne, Suzuka, Monaco, Abu Dhabi, Montreal, Brazil). But, at that point, you're getting a lot of races that are worth double, sort of spoiling the specialty. Maybe it would work better if the rewards were only say 1.5x payout with this many races. Also, with one per continent, you could theoretically cycle between tracks that get the double, although this means some tracks receive it every year or two 2 while others get it only every 9 years.

I just can't help but shake the feeling that this decision was largely based on a few people with substantial power and money wanting to try and validate their race rather than genuinely wanting to keep it interesting (could easily end up being a India, Turkey, Korea, or Fuji). I admit I would still be upset if it was Brazil getting double points as the season closer, but I wouldn't be this mad.

The points are a big deal. They change results.

Right now it's one race, but how long until Monaco is double points? Or Silverstone? Or Spa? Or another Tilkedrome with a ton of money and influence? Imagine if promoters were straight up given the option to pay to make their race worth more points. Heck, you don't even need to imagine that hard because that's almost what has happened here.

The rest aren't huge things, but after what was a pretty boring season it's these kinds of things that finally irk people enough to stop watching.

Really? What the hell are they thinking then?

The FIA has gone full retard.

I find myself hoping that the cost cap is bad enough to force a breakaway series.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/111742

Ferrari says they would consider a LMP1 campaign using a derivative of their turbo V6 F1 engine.

This could be awesome.

Also POV, the real footage is shot a lot closer to the road.

That first one, jesus christ.

I could definitely see GP2 cars running faster than the backmarkers. HRT was only a second or two faster than the best GP2 cars on some tracks.

Last edited by Rappa Z, Wed 4 Dec 2013, 17:38.

70% on Europe, all my mistakes thanks to those warring countries from the 90's. 100% on 'Murica, but it's tricky with those midwest squares.

I have this distinct vision of a bunch of RC geeks sitting in a room and piloting these drones, delighted by the fact that they are finally getting paid for it.

Too bad Rockstar hired a woman named Shelby Wilender to do the modeling.

And if she's any celebrity's lookalike then it ought to be Kate Upton.

I played it at a friend's house.

Quality is outstanding for what they have, but they've cut down on the quantity quite a bit. A lot of cars and tracks are gone, but I really only noticed the missing tracks because they have the cars I actually want to drive. I just hope the update the Nurburgring and bring it back in a DLC.

It's not great that Maldonado is at Lotus, but at least he'll provide the money they need to keep giving Grosjean a shot.

The auto aim kills it, just aim at a car and point up a a little and boom, they're dead.

Killing a pedestrian with a gun while driving is an art form now.