|
Jim Clark died in a formula two race.
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
Old Spa would have to rank highly as well I think.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Riso posted:Jim Clark died in a formula two race. Yes, but in a Lotus. I guess it technically wouldn't count.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
George Zimmer posted:Yes, but in a Lotus. If I were to die in a race, this would be the car whatever the formula (preferably Graham Hills).
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Montjuïc was insanity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
njsykora posted:Old Spa would have to rank highly as well I think. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oB1FBplQJI
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Wow Peter Windsor just eviscerated Bottas in his latest video, and practically out and out said Massa was a better driver than him despite being washed up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Norns posted:Nurburgring. Indianapolis tops it though. 1. indy, 57 2. nurburgring, 48 3. monza, 30 4. circuit de la sarthe, 27 5. daytona, 24
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 21:55
|
|
|
Norns posted:Think I need some prints. Yeah some of these own I may need to do this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
http://www.crash.net/f1/news/229208/1/engine-change-slowly-destroying-f1-says-ecclestone.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
1500quidporsche posted:Wow Peter Windsor just eviscerated Bottas in his latest video, and practically out and out said Massa was a better driver than him despite being washed up. Peter Windsor is a retard.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:http://www.crash.net/f1/news/229208/1/engine-change-slowly-destroying-f1-says-ecclestone.html Bernie is right as always.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Anyone hoping Honda or Renault to catch Mercedes even next season is super loving delusional.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Pete Windsor is the FIA and Bernie's tame journalist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
MustardFacial posted:Peter Windsor is a retard. He is. But he's also quite right about Bottas.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
El Hefe posted:Bernie is right as always. I'm confused by your contradictory statement, if he's always right then why did he use his three votes to say yes to the Hybrids?
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:I'm confused by your contradictory statement, if he's always right then why did he use his three votes to say yes to the Hybrids? whether or not bernie wanted the hybrid originally is almost irrelevant. the manufacturers wanted them, demanded them, and he really had no choice but to go along. and he's complaining about the expense here, but the expense is not the problem. the problem is the vast performance differentials between the four engines in the difficulty in closing that gap. no one foresaw that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Got talked into buying a 1 month subscription to MotoGP. It's rather well done. Why, Bernie, why can't we have that for F1??
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
I get that they can't change the formula immediately because Mercedes made a huge investment and they are winning a lot and they'd be pissed off, but they have to do something because them winning every race is only going to cause ratings to drop even further. Just dropping the tokens isn't enough, Mercedes aren't resting on their laurels, they keep improving their engine and they are going to stay ahead for sure, the only thing Renault or Honda can do is make reliable engines so they don't look like amateurs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
El Hefe posted:I get that they can't change the formula immediately because Mercedes made a huge investment and they are winning a lot and they'd be pissed off, but they have to do something because them winning every race is only going to cause ratings to drop even further. i am nowhere near smart enough to say this with any certainty but the high downforce package that is supposed to be introduced next year should lessen this formula's reliance on engine performance. i also think its unfair to suggest mercedes is winning solely because their engine is the best.
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
The hybrid thing was a clusterfuck right from the start. It wasn't just the manufacturers, the customer teams were all happy to have all the electrical gubbins in the cars, Williams and Mclaren especially. So long as the manufacturers were the ones to subsidise development to the tune of well over 600 billion so far but without having any more of a say in how the sport was run than they were. But oh no, can't have development costs spiral out of control so got to put in a token system to limit how much is spent on engine development, which is A, none of the customer teams, Bernie, or the FIA's business, and B, going to prevent anyone who got it wrong from fixing it for at least 3 seasons. Oh and BTW we don't want to actually pay for those engines, we want them for 8 million euros a year. I rather suspect when the new contracts are drawn up in 2020, unless someone magics up a new huge sponsorship deal to prop the sport then the works teams are going to end up as our new formula 1 overlords and we are watching Bernie and Todt's last desperate, and increasingly insane, attempts to hold on to power. It is truly a glorious time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
You just have to look at Williams to see that the Mercedes engine is only part of the reason they're ultra dominant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
be nice wicka posted:1. indy, 57 Not one even close to the Snaefell Mountain Course at a cool 262 if you count all related deaths or 248 if you just count pilots.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
be nice wicka posted:I also think its unfair to suggest mercedes is winning solely because their engine is the best. It's not solely due to the engine, but the majority of their success is due to it, yeah. 1500quidporsche posted:You just have to look at Williams to see that the Mercedes engine is only part of the reason they're ultra dominant. Or hell, look at Manor last race. A team that previously was struggling to race at the back, and now is able to push to 17th.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
1500quidporsche posted:You just have to look at Williams to see that the Mercedes engine is only part of the reason they're ultra dominant. Of course its only part of the equation, McLaren were also poo poo back when they had the Merc engine, but it's impossible to beat Mercedes without at the very least an engine as powerful as them since their chassis and aero are also amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
MustardFacial posted:It's not solely due to the engine, but the majority of their success is due to it, yeah. Pascal was in the top 5 of fastest laps last week iirc
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
and also because the engine was designed around Petronas which last year gave them 20% extra. Although to be fair there is nothing stopping customer teams going to one of Petronas'' rivals and going "help".
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
MustardFacial posted:It's not solely due to the engine, but the majority of their success is due to it, yeah. don't get me wrong, the merc engine is great, but they were running a year old car last season. their improvement is most certainly not solely due to the engine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Got talked into buying a 1 month subscription to MotoGP. It's rather well done. Why, Bernie, why can't we have that for F1??  
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Where was the graphics for that seagull last year?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
learnincurve posted:and also because the engine was designed around Petronas which last year gave them 20% extra.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
GentlemanofLeisure posted:What? Not being lovely, I just don't understand what you're saying here. Gave them 20% "better" fuel? i assume she means 20% extra HP, which is probably an exaggeration, but nonetheless there was a significant performance loss due to mclaren using exxonmobil fuels/oils in 2014
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
Interesting. I knew that happened, and that Shell makes special formulations for Ferrari, but I had no idea fuel formulation provided that kind of performance boost.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
I'm honestly not sure myself, I did know but I forgot because it was explained by Ted, it's to do with special engine lubrication that does something with heat so they can either run 20% more power or with 20% more efficiency than customers. Ferrari said that Shell managed to give them 15% "more power" last year as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
mobil said they gave mclaren a "double-digit" horsepower increase this year, by which i assume they mean just barely 10, but still
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
GentlemanofLeisure posted:Interesting. I knew that happened, and that Shell makes special formulations for Ferrari, but I had no idea fuel formulation provided that kind of performance boost. It makes sense in the context of the fuel flow limit. Its not like the older days where it was literally just getting the right air/fuel mixture to maximize detonation. They're handicapped by the fuel flow limit which is why the engines only rev to 12 or 13k since any higher they lean out. The more energy you can pack into a fixed volume of fuel the better the engine becomes. I mean they're doing crazy other stuff now to the oil as well to minimize drivetrain frequency, its all stuff that they really wouldn't have considered before that's now been brought into play by the fuel flow limit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
be nice wicka posted:don't get me wrong, the merc engine is great, but they were running a year old car last season. their improvement is most certainly not solely due to the engine. In the last part of 2015 yeah, the car really started to show its age.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:Got talked into buying a 1 month subscription to MotoGP. It's rather well done. Why, Bernie, why can't we have that for F1?? Because contracts and stuff. Mostly stuff. MLB.tv is also excellent and great value for money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
MLB.tv blacks out your local games. MLS live blacks out all national televised games, even if they're on poo poo tier channels like unimas. the answer to the question is that, unless you had no significant TV presence before (e.g. motogp), it's still going to be more lucrative to give priority to traditional TV channels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
Blue Jays aren't blacked out in Canada despite the whole country being a home market which makes MLB.tv incredibly worth while. Not quite sure how that works but the same company that broadcasts the games also owns the teams so I'm pretty sure they really don't care so long as they get the revenue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2016 04:33
|
|