correct.
*SPOILERS* F1 Brazilian Grand Prix 2007, Final Race!!
(756 posts, started )
correct.
I'm absolutely amazed at the (lack of) time difference I think the actual qualy times were 1.12s (so 4 secs) and Senna would have been on a qualy engine and stickier tires, the track may have been slightly wider and faster in places. Still though it's amazing given how far things have developed in 16 years 
Was the '91 car still on an H gate, I didn't look to see how he was changing but that did sound a bit to consistant and perfect for a human shift. There's a video somewhere of Senna at Suzuka ('88?) with stunning shifts.
Was the '91 car still on an H gate, I didn't look to see how he was changing but that did sound a bit to consistant and perfect for a human shift. There's a video somewhere of Senna at Suzuka ('88?) with stunning shifts.
yup, three pedals, as in a normal road car (albeit without and servo assistance). In fact that McLaren is closer to my F3 car than it is to a modern F1 car (apart from that fact that one is driven by a complete dunce, and the McLaren wasn't).
I've driven hundreds of miles in cars with the clutch cable snapped. It's not an unreasonable question since crash boxes are common in race cars. Unless you're really stretching the "clutch" seriously beyond reason, but I'm no expert and even I could work out what niall meant.
1991 MP4/6 in qualifying trim would have super sticky (fully slick) qualy tyres (only good enough for 1 flying lap). A special qualifying V12 engine pumping out 750-780bhp at about 15,000rpm (cut back to about 13,000 for race). Sequential 6 speed gearbox (which became a semi auto later in season). Active suspension and Traction Control (albeit a basic version).
1991 was also the year the FW14 was born, the F1 car regarded by many to be the greatest F1 car of all time. (obviously thats subjective)
1991 was a good year for F1 (pun only slightly intended)
Just for comparison. The 1956 Maserati 250F used a 4.2 V8 producing about 450bhp. Could do 0-60 in 4 secs and top speed of about 160-170 mph, and no seatbelts or roll cage.
Although i'm not sure it's right to compare cars of different era's too closely, what with the restrictions in regulations that crop up every few years.
1991 was also the year the FW14 was born, the F1 car regarded by many to be the greatest F1 car of all time. (obviously thats subjective)
1991 was a good year for F1 (pun only slightly intended)
Just for comparison. The 1956 Maserati 250F used a 4.2 V8 producing about 450bhp. Could do 0-60 in 4 secs and top speed of about 160-170 mph, and no seatbelts or roll cage.
Although i'm not sure it's right to compare cars of different era's too closely, what with the restrictions in regulations that crop up every few years.
I agree, since regulations are such a quagmire of variables on a per-season level. So much new knowledge and understanding of aerodynamics, and of course all the new counter-speed regulations and counter-performance safety enhancements.. safety is such a massive consideration these days, and nothing at all from 10 years ago, in any variation of motorsports, can compete with the poorest F1 car of today on that score.
Erm... no, without looking anything up I can tell you that statement is very wrong. The 250F had a 2.5litre straight 6, some of the later cars were 2.5litre V12s, certainly no 4.2litre V8s to be seen. Power output would have been just under 300bhp
Lol, oh yeah, the 250 bit kinda gave it away
. it's been a long hard day, i'm getting it confused with the engine's in some of the later road cars, which had nowhere near 450 bhp, dunno what i was thinking of there ? I've confused myself....http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php ... item.php?fes_art_id=33288
When you read how Mosley himself admits to being biased towards Ferrari, why do people still call the bias "speculation"? It seems to be a given fact, as far as Mosley is concerned.
When you read how Mosley himself admits to being biased towards Ferrari, why do people still call the bias "speculation"? It seems to be a given fact, as far as Mosley is concerned.
Are you serious? Are you honestly thinking it's Ferrari which have been favoured through this whole season?
.
.
THIS season? I was thinking more along the lines of "as long as I've been watching F1"
Sam, I thought you went "ZOMG! NURBURGRING WAS FIRST F1 RACE I SAW EVR!" 
well i'm a bit late joining the party, but that was TOTALLY AWESOME!!!!! it couldn't have gone better if i'd scripted it myself. the ferrari's completely destroy the field, and hamilton chokes. if he'd been taken out by someone else we never would have heard the end of it, but he choked, choked, choked, two races in a row, and he can't blame anyone but himself for losing the championship.
my only regret is that massa had to give up the win at his home race. he didn't look terribly pleased about it, but on the other hand, he's not whining like a baby about it either. can't wait for next year!
my only regret is that massa had to give up the win at his home race. he didn't look terribly pleased about it, but on the other hand, he's not whining like a baby about it either. can't wait for next year!
on the Massa part
1). he's not a crying baby like Alonso is~
2). it would've been stated in his contract somewhere not to whine about things like these, we know Ferrari...
I'm sure LH must be thinking again what he done wrong in China... that was just idiotic really, and now that cost him the championship..
there is no point in trying to compair senna's car to todays there a completly different animal now, i dont care what super sticky tires he was on or what ever just look at his driving!!, the man was insanely good, ive never seen anyne take on a track the way he did, simply majestic...
"Ooo, what does this button do?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqHZ_xaB4Es
Rumor has it that Hamilton caused his own drive problems by hitting the wrong button on the wheel. :doh:
http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news ... -t-want-to-win-on-appeal/
Good man!
Rumor has it that Hamilton caused his own drive problems by hitting the wrong button on the wheel. :doh:
http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news ... -t-want-to-win-on-appeal/
Good man!
Been there, done that? I didn't think so
I read that too, but in a very different way. Mosley is saying he does all he can to prevent the British 'mafia' or cartel from doing anything bad to Ferrari since everything in F1 is owned and organised by British people, so he wants to makes sure that Ferrari isn't trampled under the feet of the British Empire.
Again, I see some poetic justice here, since the word 'mafia' has been used to describe Ferrari even in this forum.
Overall the definition of 'mafia' is totally distasteful and disgraceful, but I guess non-Italian people rarely know what they're talking about when they mention such a word. Calling someone 'mafioso' is just like using the infamous 'n' word here. Say it to the right person and you'll probably face a trial, or a broken nose. Say it to the wrong person and you're dead.
And as far as I see it, McLaren has been protected more than necessary this year, but I think it was done more to preserve the show than to effectively do a favour to McLaren.
Edit: wise words from Hamilton on the appeal. If Dennis was a wise man, he'd retire the appeal. Otherwise I'll just think about another scripted debate just to show how Hamilton is a clean guy...
Nucking semantics...
Is ok to say "cosa nostra" (or "cosa loro" since it's not really ours)?
I'll have to agree though - McLaren really ungracefully shot itself in the foot this year, and somehow I think it has a lot to do with Mr Dennis himself or the broomstick he's got stuck up his rectum - he should just focus on whatever he's good at and hire someone else for the PR or in-team relations.
OT: Cosa nostra, our thing, is related to Sicilian mafia, which is proper mafia, as opposed to 'Ndrangheta (Calabrese mafia) or Camorra (mafia from Naples). All kind of mafia are deeply rooted in local territory in specific areas of the South, despite having worldwide relationship and businesses. Areas outside Calabria, Sicily and Campania are generally affected only in a secondary way, specifically money laundering. Crimes against the State or people are generally limited to the territories directly controlled by Mafia (with the notable exception of a bombing at Accademia dei Georgofili, Florence. EDIT: I forgot to add the murders in Duisburg, Germany, much more recent).
No, it's not okay. Identifying specifically a kind of mafia is even worse.
Anyway Luca Cordero di Montezemolo has taken a huge step against mafia since he's also President of the Confindustria (Association of Industries), and he declared that an industrial who has even a loose tie with mafia (such as having to pay for 'protection') should be excluded from Confindustria.
So the term is even more improper, undeserved and insulting.
Thanks - now you've re-ignited my interest in this enough to read up on more low-level mafia history. I had only read about 20th century American mafia and medieval Italian intrigue, guilds and inter-city conflicts, time to cover the 600 year gap I guess.
I'm not comparing the cars, i just think that i thought the cars looked bloody Quick in todays trim - 16 years ago they were almost the same thing - they must of been insane.
carnt disagree there
Albieg, it's interesting how you read that from Mosley. There is no preoccupation with mafia in the UK. It's pretty well an alien concept in Britain, in fact. I realised how very alien when I lived in Chicago for 5 years - one of the bars I drank in with friends, on what used to be called "Easy Street", is supposedly where Al Capone caught a nasty disease.. living in Chicago made me realise how almost completely devoid of mafia the UK is. So to hear Mosley describe a defence against such a thing in the UK sounds as much like fiction, to Brits, as if Mosley said that his bias was to prevent Todt being abducted by aliens. Brits all just go "eh!?".
*SPOILERS* F1 Brazilian Grand Prix 2007, Final Race!!
(756 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG