|
I like Hulkenberg for the record. He's a good midfield driver.
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
He was pretty good against Perez, and Perez (especially in recent years) is v good. Therefore I think the Hulk is pretty good too. If you don't consider him atleast a decent talent then thats not saying much for the rest of the grid. I mean he is clearly better then Stroll, Ericsson, and Palmer. Very likely better then Magnussen, Kvyat, current - Massa, Vandoorne (although he could be improving) Arguably better then Ocon (could improve), Grosjean (who I find massively overrated), Wehrlein, current - Raikkonen. Probably around equal to Bottas and Perez.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
I think Stoffel is being held back by his car. He scored points with a decidedly less poo poo McLaren last year, so there's definitely some talent there. e: In a better car, I can see GRO performing better (as in podiums potentially), or continuing to finish mid-low points. He's probably in the same boat as Hulk is: decent driver, decent car, maybe good for a support role as the guy you want on a top team to help secure the WCC but won't challenge your #1. e2: also, well delayed, but I think F1 putting in the higher curbs is a good idea. Enforcing track limits via software is dumb. Enforcing them via actual potential damage to the car? Better. Until someone launches anyway. iospace fucked around with this message at 05:55 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
a kitten posted:I was sort of vaguely interested in following F1 again and now i can't even figure out what happened to Good Lotus. Are they still around in some form? I don't see that cool black and gold 2011 livery anywhere. black and gold was bad lotus
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 06:37
|
|
|
Hope this isn't too much to ask but can I get your opinions on best looking f1 car? I know this is a broad question but whatever. I'll open with this guy.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 08:44
|
|
|
Dubs posted:black and gold was bad lotus Black and Gold was Lotus rather than Caterham running under the Lotus name for some reason. Lotus are not actively racing, again. They've been having some... uhh... financial booboos for several years, even though they're actively making the most rational Lotus in decades.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
Wiltsghost posted:Hope this isn't too much to ask but can I get your opinions on best looking f1 car? I know this is a broad question but whatever. I'll open with this guy. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
Wiltsghost posted:Hope this isn't too much to ask but can I get your opinions on best looking f1 car? I know this is a broad question but whatever. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 09:53
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 09:56
|
|
|
Gurney Eagle.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 10:00
|
|
|
Wiltsghost posted:Hope this isn't too much to ask but can I get your opinions on best looking f1 car? I know this is a broad question but whatever. I'll open with this guy.  I have nothing else to add because the red and white McLaren is my real choice too. (The worst thread is always the best when we get into liveries.)
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 10:15
|
|
|
Also any Ferrari with the number 27 gives me the feels.  
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 10:27
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 10:59
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 11:00
|
|
|
Wiltsghost posted:Hope this isn't too much to ask but can I get your opinions on best looking f1 car? I know this is a broad question but whatever. I'll open with this guy. It's this one.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 11:14
|
|
|
Caterham were physically and morally good lotus, they had the factory and all the old cars. Then Renault were sold to a consortium without a name and were sponsored by the road car wing of Lotus. They simply bullied their way into calling themselves lotus because at that brief moment in time they had lots of money and caterham did not.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 11:14
|
|
|
It's definitely this one, though it's a close first to 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 11:42
|
|
|
If we're talking recent cars, I'm a bit fond of Honda's 2008 efforts - loved the livery... shame about those godawful wheel cover things that were all the rage (and looked hideous) edit: vvvv and that enri fucked around with this message at 13:19 on May 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 11:52
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 12:01
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 12:33
|
|
|
Theophany posted:Also any Ferrari with the number 27 gives me the feels. I love the V12 look, the rounded nose and wide rear wing still makes me happy. Though not as much as this hideous yet beautiful thing, I love the flat nose. 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
If there is one good thing about the Andrea Modas it's that they were decent looking cars.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
 It's the appropriate use of colour that does it for me.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:15
|
|
|
Your favourite F1 car is the 9/11 Ferrari? Lmao heil hitler
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
Wirth1000 posted:Lmao heil hitler
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:45
|
|
|
Diet Crack posted:
You went for 90s Renault Williams and didn't even pick the best one:  Damon Hill in this livery was my favourite pick in the 1996 Formula 1 game.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
I miss the days of simpler aero.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:52
|
|
|
Also for old cars I love this weird loving thing.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:54
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:55
|
|
|
iospace posted:I miss the days of simpler aero. Define simpler:  Shark fins though are an abomination, no contest.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 13:56
|
|
|
I could be really naive but I think Ferrari was just responding to Mercedes. RBR also did, no one was skewering them for "team-ordering" Ricciardo around Max. Sky sucks. Monaco sucks.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
Antti posted:Define simpler: Jochen Rindt 
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
Antti posted:Define simpler: Front wings that have ten million elements (today's) are not as attractive to me as the ones that have maybe 3-5 elements (like the MP4/4's, which has two if you don't count the side boards). I understand that each element has a purpose, but it feels needlessly complex.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:02
|
|
|
iospace posted:I miss the days of simpler aero. If you were watching F1 from like 2005 to 2008 then even the current cars can still very easily be defined as simple aero. No elephant wings, chimneys, double decker front wings...
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
Whilst Jense may have pissed in Nando's F1 car, I suspect Nando shat in his IndyCar. https://twitter.com/StorkPatrick/status/869309605184241664
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
iospace posted:Front wings that have ten million elements (today's) are not as attractive to me as the ones that have maybe 3-5 elements (like the MP4/4's, which has two if you don't count the side boards). I understand that each element has a purpose, but it feels needlessly complex. Honestly I agree, but I wonder if it's bias from having grown up in the 90s. The aero on the 90s cars looks appropriate and slick while the modern cars just have too many bits and bobs on them. On the other hand outside of the shark fin, the cars in 2017 look pretty close to the cars from 1997 in general appearance. Just don't sweat the details. But then you go to late 1980s and the cars have this stubby quality to them and the further back you go the weirder and goofier the cars look until you loop back around to classy. In that sense I guess the aero has been "solved" in the 90s once we got computers and wind tunnels, and now it's just a matter of futzing around the rules.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
Wirth1000 posted:If you were watching F1 from like 2005 to 2008 then even the current cars can still very easily be defined as simple aero. No elephant wings, chimneys, double decker front wings... Yeah... It's why I love the MP4/4. It's simple and clean. Also, I think the aero is still as bad as back then, it's just hidden well down in in the barge board instead of, you know, all the bits hanging off the side pods. Antti posted:Honestly I agree, but I wonder if it's bias from having grown up in the 90s. The aero on the 90s cars looks appropriate and slick while the modern cars just have too many bits and bobs on them. Yup, CAD is pretty much how it got here, that's for sure.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
There is no way than current cars are more complicated than the Williams FW14B
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2017 14:11
|
|