First of all, tyres. Bridgestone is not as competitive as Michelin for this season mileage (one set of tyres must endure throughout two qualification seasons and the race).
Next, Ferrari began the season with the same model car than they used at the end of the former season. Meanwhile, Renault and others had theirs developed. The new model that Ferrari has eventually introduced after the first two races of this season is not as reliable as it should be. One engine has to endure two races and four qualification sessions. (Ferrari has even developed together with Olympus optics firm a glass-fiber endoscope to be introduced in the engine, through the spark holes, immediately after the race to directly observe the state of cylinders.)
Finally, strategy. There is not so many possibilities this season in order to program pit stops to change tyres and refill the tank. This adds to the above-said first reason.
227mph + across the front row for Indy. Now if they can just figure out how to get rid of that annoying "scrubbing off speed" through the turns, maybe they'll start to go fast
that Danica didn't put in 4 clean laps, given the speed in the last 3 she did. Having driven 165mph and done over 130 regularly, that speed is just mind boggleing in the amount of concentration required to hold on to it. Even if it is just left turns!
Now, for those with wider tastes, there is the ALMS and World Challenge at Mid-Ohio this weekend and I'm guessing on Speed Channel some. I'll track it live on line when I'm around the house. ALMS Radio is good if you get used to the accent.
Then again as noted before, take what you have and go to a Driving Event and see what it's like on a road race course, you might get hooked ...
Kimi Raikkonen (McLaren-Mercedes) won in Montecarlo. Excellent combination of pilot, engine, chassis and tyres. McLaren-Mercedes team choose for the race the softest tyres among those offered by Michelin.
Next came Nick Heifeld and Mark Weber (Williams-BMW), in said order. Fernando Alonso was second four laps before the end. Then he was overtaken by both Williams-BMW but he could resist Juan P. Montoya's (McLaren-Mercedes).
Alonso's choice of tyres was worse than that of Raikkonen. Alonso's rear tyres were in very poor condition throughout the race. It seems that Renault chasis is not as good for the rear tyres as it is McLaren-Mercedes chasis. In addition, Renault's strategy proved to be very bad: both Renault cars refilled gas too early. Ferrari were again performing not as well as they would have desired.
Next race is Nurburgring in Germany, next weekend. You may follow qualification and racing events, at living time, at http://www.formula1.com/
In the ALMS race at Mid-Ohio there were several great passes and getting to see it on CBS Sunday morning was a real treat. The Dyson cars in P1, did well and Audi which as been unbeatable in the past did poorly. P2 has a new mix with a Mazda running well. The Corvettes did as expected except at the end when the No. 4 blocked the No 3 on pit lane to take over first and then got penalized 20secs putting him back into 2nd place, not a way to make friends on the team and the answer by Fehan, the GM guy seemed pretty lame as well. Oh, there were some Porsche's there in GT2 and one Flying Lizard car, I think was leading when he went off into a sand pit and sat while somebody passed him. I think the P2 winner was sitting in the sand at the checkered flag as well. A wet ending to a mostly dry race.
Its that time of year again - time for Indy predictions.
Who do you think will win and who do you think will surprise the field with a good performance?
I'm going with Kenny Brack to win. He is with the best team (or at least as good as Andretti) and has the skills and experience. As for a surprise - look for Hearn with his unique Panoz/Chevrolet to finish in the top ten.
So many things have to go right to win the 500, and there are a number of cars that are capable of winning if everything falls into place. If not for a bobble on the first lap of qualifying, Danica Patrick probably would be sitting on the pole. I'm not much on longshots, and rookies aren't generally who I'd pick, but what the heck... why not have the first female winner be a rookie as well.
Fernando Alonso won for the fourth time this season. Meanwhile, Kimi Raikkonen went out of the race in the first corner of the last lap.
Raikonnen's front right suspension triangle broke down because of massive vibrations caused by flat spots made in the matching wheel when Raikonnen blocked the brakes several times trying to resist Alonso's attack. That front right wheel was truly squared in this final part of the race. However Raikonnen decided no to pit.
Both, Raikonnen and Alonso, were driving to their limits throughout the race. Alonso was trapped in a car mess that occurred at the first corner of the first lap. Raikonnen took advantage and then Alonso was pursuing him lap after lap. Finally, the gap between them came down from 25 sec. to 1.5 sec. and then Raikonnen's suspension went to hell ('se fue al carajo' in Alonso's words at the press conference hold at the race end). A very exciting race to see (not to say to drive, go figure!). There is full race report and images at:
Compared to the destruction derby in NASCAR this weekend. Watched some of it over dinner without the sound but the number of cautions and the stupid moves shown on the replay were amazing. Jr. deserved to be taken out.
The Indy on the other hand was fun to watch and Danica was fun to watch even if she made a mistake or two. Think I'd stick to road courses, going flat out just doesn't seem to be anything but scary, astounding speeds. :surprise:
Well that was interesting. Except for the race, I mean.
Here's a summary but I'm no F1 expert, so correct me if I'm wrong. Michelin said it couldn't explain the problem with its tires (Ralf Schumacher crashed during qualifying) and recommended against using their tires on a certain high speed banked turn... so the seven (out of 10) teams using its tires said they wouldn't race unless they could use new tires or a chicane was installed to slow down speeds before that turn. FIA said no, so after the formation lap, 14 out of the 20 cars pitted and didn't race. Ferrari, Jordan, and Minardi continued racing - the latter two just to compete against each other.
I think the rules change to only allow one set of tires for qualifying and racing was meant to force teams to pace their tire use... so if the drivers are pushing too hard and their tires blow up, it's due to a faulty strategy. If Michelin-equipped teams were having tire trouble, the current set of rules were written to punish them by forcing them to drive more slowly and carefully.
But I don't know just how dangerous Michelin felt its tires were. Either way, the rules that teams should use worn tires doesn't seem like the best way to make F1 interesting again... once again it's technology over skill, and it's not the safest way to race either.
it's the END for F1 in the US and a real black mark on the sport. Carlismo you are right in saying that the tire rules pose an uneccessary danger and IMO bear the greater part of the blame for this nonsense, although there's plenty to go around.
Carlisimo and Andys 120, I agree with both of you. What a shame, such big fiasco!
Yes, Michelin advised his teams not to drive Indianapolis because not only Ralf Schumacher but also many other cars (among them that of the 3rd. pilot of McLaren Mercedes, Pedro de la Rosa) had their tyres in so bad condition after qualification that the risk of disintegration would have been at it most after 10 laps. Then, the pilots/teams with Michelin tyres offered to race upon condition of being allowed to change tyres or, alternatively, to place that chicane in the oval corner to reduce speed but specially lateral friction. In both cases, Michelin pilots would give up the race points to the Bridgestone teams. These would have got them according to their position at the end of the race. Thus, Michelin equipped teams would had been penalized (Bridgestone had no default tyres) but the race would had been preserved. All teams but Ferrari accepted this solution. FIA and the F1 owner, Brian Ecclestone, supported Ferrari and subsequently the real race was over.
All this is indeed very bad for F1, not only in the USA but also in Europe. In past years, some attempts have been made in order to organize a separate championship ruled by an independent association of F1 car constructors, which are not happy with Ecclestone's iron rules. Brian Ecclestone and Ferrari have always stopped this. May be now will happeen a seggregation/desintegration within the F1.
We had a very nice 24 Hours of Le Mans race, on the other hand.
I came back from a camping trip on Sunday morning just a few minutes before the start of the race. I ran off to the local gas station to get a paper and coffee in hopes of returning before the usually exciting start of the U.S. GP. Upon my return I asked my seven year old, who much to my surprise was still watching, "Did the race start yet?" He responded with, "Yes and there are only six cars out there". In disbelief, I watched as just a few cars, separated by great stretches of track "raced" around Indy while Speed Channel counted down the laps. Beautiful.
I remember the backlash suffered by CART after they made an ill-fated visit to the Texas Motor Speedway with their 900hp+ Lolas and Reynards. The results were all too predictible. CART never really recovered from that mess.
You know, there is this track in rural Wisconsin called Road America that is just SCREAMING OUT for an F1 race...........
Corvette took 1 & 2 in GTS/GT1 depending on which article I read and ran hard all 24 hours after the Aston's litteraly ran out of gas late in the race. I understand that all four cars were on the same lap after something like 20 hours, wish I'd been around to see some of it. Randy
Yeah, and the atmosphere around the track is nice as well (two small villages plenty with the excited crowd, an attraction fair and and so on).
By the way, Sebastian Loeb (Citröen, former World Rally Champion and leader this season) was one of the three pilots driving one of the Pescarolo prototypes that confronted Audis up to almost the end of the race. Loeb was very well adapted to the Pescarolo, but one of the team-mates of him did eventually a mistake that take the car out of the track.
Best regards, José
PS: I am sorry I wrote Brian instead of Bernie (Ecclestone) in a former post of mine. This sort of lapsus are becoming too much frequent in me. Should I be worried? What a future awaits me? :confuse: :sick: :mad:
...at Infineon Raceway in California was quite good. I'm not a NASCAR fan generally, but I'll always watch the rare road course circuit events. I esp. like the the "ringer" drivers pulled from the ranks of the Trans-Am series. Boris Said is always a pleasure to watch, and the tv network even had some in-car footage of his fancy footwork while running the course.
Tony Stewart got the win, and showed that he clearly belongs in a different sort of racing (his last victory was at Watkins Glen last year, which is the only other road course in NASCAR). He even did it one-handed...he lost 4th gear, and 3rd was going, so he was forced to drive with one hand on the shifter to keep it together. Hard enough as is, but even cooler considering that he managed do this and pass Ricky Rudd to take the lead and win the race.
CART has been reduced to a spec series with every team using Lolas with Ford/Cosworth power.
The IRL will soon be reduced to a near-spec series with all teams limited to Honda power and a choice between Panoz or Dallara. For those who haven't heard, "Chevrolet" (read: Cosworth) and Toyota will leave the series after 2005 and 2006 respectively.
Here is my idea for cost savings and long term viability of open wheel racing in America. Merge the two series (duh!) and radically change the rules. The first change would involve engines. It was a nice run with turbo V8s and the ever shrinking IRL DOHC V8 package, but technology has rendered those platforms practically useless because they tend to cost too much and produce too much power. I would guess that if Honda, Ford and M-B had stayed in CART under the rules of 1995 that their engines would be producing in excess of 1000hp today. That isn't safe or sustainable.
The fix -switch to NASCAR type V8's of about 4.5-5.0 liters - carbs, pushrods and all. There are numerous NASCAR engine builders who would gladly expand their operations to build Indy engines. Don't think for one moment that Roush, Penske, Ganassi, DEI, Childress, Yates, Hendrick and whom ever it is who produces the Toyota engines for the Truck series wouldn't love to have one of their engines win Indy or the CART/IRL championship. They are competitive enough as it is. This would just fuel the fire. The apparatus is in place so why not use it?
Cars - Starting in 2007 (along with the new engine package) would be a new chassis package. With Lola, Panoz, Dallara, Reynard and anybody else interested would be allowed to submit designs for approval. Those which meet approal would be used for a three year period, much in the same way the IRL currently handles things. Downforce would be kept in check. Think early 80's March for a benchmark.
Schedule - 18 races (basically every other week from March through October) with six road courses and 12 "ovals". Tracks like Richmond would be off limits (way too small) and street courses like Denver (NO room to pass) would also be eliminated.
I think Brock Yates had a somwhat similar idea in Car & Driver awhile ago. His idea was basically to eliminate all the wings and ground effects, have the cars more like they were in the 50s or 60s - with more of a premium on driver skill and less on who has the best aero package.
John_324 - You know, it's funny, for as much as purists like to look down their nose at NASCAR, it's run better than any other series. I can't imagine them having a fiasco like F1 did recently....
Each of the 'owners' of the series has an economic incentive to keep their's alive even if on life support. I agree, doesn't make sense long term but how you gonna get them to give an inch to make things better, I just don't see it. I'll be glad to be proved wrong.
OTOH, ALMS is getting more interest and at least the Corvette's and Porsche's are closer to real cars than most anything else on the track above SCCA/NASA. It's fun to watch either for the faithful or for those looking to root for the underdog, think Panoz, love that sound!
Sonoma was a fun race to watch, just when you thought it was going to be a run away, something broke. There wasn't near as much contact for the sake of ego as on the ovals. Just bummed me out when Kasey K. had the throttle stick going into turn 11, ugly way to go. Randy
I can't stand NASCAR the way it currently is, with race cars using decals for headlights, still stuck using carbs, running RWD Tauruses, etc. I see NASCAR as nothing but funny cars that run in circles.
So yes, make them "stock" cars again, and maybe then I'll think differently. Until then, NASCAR is off my radar screen.
We here may all agree that NASCAR is no fun and sports cars are the real deal but the $'s are in NASCAR along with the vast majority of the fans. I did the practice day at ALMS Infineon last June and walked the pits taking pics of the cars and drivers from about 15 ft. Reason I don't try for the NASCAR event is too much traffic, not to mention the crowds once at the track. I too did Riverside back in the mid to late 60's and enjoyed the experience at a road course. Had no idea what it took to drive one of those monsters and sure it is much easier today. But that is what gets me to watch some of NASCAR today, just the incar video and telemetry to see what it takes at speed. Again, better in a sports car but harder to find on the TV.
Since I've driven in some cars at speed on track, I've got a lot more respect for anyone who pushes the limits and can concentrate to stay at that level for an extended period. Doesn't make a lot of difference on an oval or a road course. Truly amazing! Randy
Oh, and I don't think 3000# vehicles at 200mph are going to revert to factory build spec's. NASCAR has the car of the future in testing and it is again a rolling cage with logo on the front, and that is about all we are going to see on ovals.
Top Gear's second episode this season had a nice little piece on why England uses "Racing Green."
I'll share, and paraphrase. Some rich American newspaper guy got the idea to hold a grand prix in England (in like... 1903 or something) in which each country would be distinguished by a color. Italy chose black, France blue, and Belgium yellow. Then Parliament set a national speed limit of 12mph. So... the whole thing was moved to Ireland. As a mark of respect for the substitute hosts, England raced in green (no specific shade).
Italy later changed to red, Japan took white, Germany silver, etc etc.
And all was good until the '60s when an innovative Lotus won some race, but it was so innovative it needed corporate sponsorship and at that point colors went up for sale.
Audi hasecided to replace the all-conquering R8 Prototype Endurance racer with a new 650hp R10 which will contest the 24 hour races using a twin turbo diesel motor!
Is a Mazda rotary the only other unconventional engine to have won? (Mazda did win it once, didn't they?)
Andy, that billboard stuff is sad, isn't it. I don't see why sponsorship has to mean a whole different base color. At least F1 Ferraris are red, and F1 Renaults are blue (but I think their blue and yellow is based on something Renault-specific).
I'm not sure that Mazda ever won LeMans out- right, I think they did take the class that corresponds to LMP2 using a rotary-powered prototype a couple of years back.
I managed to watch many of the WRC events this year. As I promised mr Holland I would try and give it a chance. Still think it is as boring as watching grass grow on TV. Turn the sound off and one in car view look pretty much like any other. I Imagine it must be pretty much fun to drive and maybe even see in person it is a lot more like time trials than I care for. However as I stated earlier in the year I don't see what all the big deal about the Subaru is. I mentioned that they can't seem to get better than third over the three years I have been posting here and they just managed forth this year. Looks like they are holding true to form.
Gotta confess I'm the same way. While I'm sure WRC is very cool to participate in and maybe view in person, it doesn't do much for me on television.
To me, having other drivers on the course at the same time is what gives racing good spectator value. That final bit of unpredictability is what makes for the best viewing.
compared to what I expect a race to be. I like seeing one car right on the tail of another or better yet pulling off a move that allows a pass. I managed to drag myself out to a Rim of the world race about two years ago. We parked the car and hiked to a spot and put out some beach chairs and blankets. A cooler was mandatory. We were pretty close to a corner so yes we could see a car sliding. However that only happens every two minutes or so. I had a chance to read a magazine during the day. In effect WRC could have drivers racing on different days and post the results once a month and if all we saw was what was on TV it would look just the same. Racing the clock is just like practice for most other racing. It is like qualifying for many of the kinds of racing I tend to watch. I am sure it is cultural to a degree but I have tried at least. I guess I will just have to say I can't get into it from a spectator point of view. To me racing has to include at least two racers at the same time. Everything else seems more like practice. My point of view only.
That's a fair point of view. I agree it'd be a lot more exciting to see WRC racers bumper to bumper. I still like it, but imo it's better as a TV show with maps, diagrams, and video clips.
The other extreme, NASCAR's endless bumper to bumper mob going around in circles, doesn't do it for me. It reminds me of the Tour de France without the interesting terrain changes, or the scenery.
I like Touring Car racing the best. Anyone seen the ad at www.testofcharacter.co.uk ? Don't watch it at work.
Sports car racing is one of the more exciting. I watch as much ALMS as I can get. And there you see the difference. When qualifying and they are all alone on the track it is much easier to turn a pretty fast time. Put another racer out there and everything changes. But then again we see a lot more of the race and don't have to have a timer somewhere tell us who won. And if you want to see cars slide around corners and still race each other go to an outlaw race. Not only is that real grass roots but the drivers will talk to you like you are a real person after the race. Once again just from my experience.
I was just speaking with Dave Hermance and Bill Reinert, the dynamic duo behind Toyota's hybrid program in the U.S.
Mr. Reinert casually remarked that he expects hybrid powertrains to be part of Formula One by 2008. He said Bernie is all for it, and everyone knows Bernie has a way of getting what he wants. The idea would be to provide additional bursts of power when needed, like when exiting corners. Just to be crystal clear, this is one of those hybrid applications that is more about performance than fuel mileage. But imagine the PR spin possibilities:
I'm all for it because I think the performance potential of hybrids is intriguing. If adopted Toyota and Honda would have the advantage because they already established in hybrid engineering.
Can someone explain the performance potential to me?
MB has unveiled their 2006 F1 motor. It generates 700hp and weighs 209 lbs. That's 3.35 hp/lb of motor.
In racing (particularly F1), weight is everything. For instance, Champion was asked (directed) by F1 teams to downsize their sparkplugs starting in 1999. They've since reduced the weight from 25.9 grams to 10.7 grams. When teams are seeking ways to trim grams from sparkplugs, I don't know how receptive they'll be to the idea of the weight required for a hybrid system.
Specs on last year's cars indicated the typical weight, ready to go with driver, was around 600kg. Last years cars were making around 900hp and (if the MB motor is indicative) the current crop will be 'down' to around 700.
Weight kills you in F1.
So lets say you developed a 100hp hybrid system. At the power/weight ratio of the current MB engine, that 100hp hybrid system would weigh only about 30lbs. Frankly, I'm having a hard time picturing a 100hp hybrid system (complete with batteries) which grosses 30lbs.
Long story short if adding hybrids to F1 DECREASES my power/weight ratio (and I'm fighting that weight in turning and braking and not just accelerating), why would I go there? Unless (of course) rules changes were implemented which FORCED hybrids.
Before you know it, F1 drivers will be as small as horse jockeys!
Being as tightly controled as it is, F1 is hard to predict or analyze. I think hybrid systems would have to be forced if they're going to be used, but it wouldn't surprise me if that's what happens.
It's too bad there isn't enough financial justification for an ultimate racing series. One in which "anything goes" as far as funding and technology. Maybe it could work if the teams were national teams, in a World Cup-like format. Governments love pouring money into national pride events. Might even be some trickle-down (just think of all the medical and genetic engineering stuff in the Olympics that might have practical uses). Well ok, I don't know how that'd be fun to watch without at least some sort of balancing rules.
I do enjoy watching F1, but I really hope Japan's Super GT series makes it on to TV. They say "don't make more than 500hp", but they let you do it however you want - from turbo-4 MR2's to V12 Ferraris. Variety and parity make for a good show.
Comments
M
First of all, tyres. Bridgestone is not as competitive as Michelin for this season mileage (one set of tyres must endure throughout two qualification seasons and the race).
Next, Ferrari began the season with the same model car than they used at the end of the former season. Meanwhile, Renault and others had theirs developed. The new model that Ferrari has eventually introduced after the first two races of this season is not as reliable as it should be. One engine has to endure two races and four qualification sessions. (Ferrari has even developed together with Olympus optics firm a glass-fiber endoscope to be introduced in the engine, through the spark holes, immediately after the race to directly observe the state of cylinders.)
Finally, strategy. There is not so many possibilities this season in order to program pit stops to change tyres and refill the tank. This adds to the above-said first reason.
Best regards,
José
Now, for those with wider tastes, there is the ALMS and World Challenge at Mid-Ohio this weekend and I'm guessing on Speed Channel some. I'll track it live on line when I'm around the house. ALMS Radio is good if you get used to the accent.
Then again as noted before, take what you have and go to a Driving Event and see what it's like on a road race course, you might get hooked ...
Next came Nick Heifeld and Mark Weber (Williams-BMW), in said order. Fernando Alonso was second four laps before the end. Then he was overtaken by both Williams-BMW but he could resist Juan P. Montoya's (McLaren-Mercedes).
Alonso's choice of tyres was worse than that of Raikkonen. Alonso's rear tyres were in very poor condition throughout the race. It seems that Renault chasis is not as good for the rear tyres as it is McLaren-Mercedes chasis. In addition, Renault's strategy proved to be very bad: both Renault cars refilled gas too early. Ferrari were again performing not as well as they would have desired.
Next race is Nurburgring in Germany, next weekend. You may follow qualification and racing events, at living time, at
http://www.formula1.com/
Best regards,
José
Looking forward to LeMans!
Who do you think will win and who do you think will surprise the field with a good performance?
I'm going with Kenny Brack to win. He is with the best team (or at least as good as Andretti) and has the skills and experience. As for a surprise - look for Hearn with his unique Panoz/Chevrolet to finish in the top ten.
Now if the weather will cooperate!
Fernando Alonso won for the fourth time this season. Meanwhile, Kimi Raikkonen went out of the race in the first corner of the last lap.
Raikonnen's front right suspension triangle broke down because of massive vibrations caused by flat spots made in the matching wheel when Raikonnen blocked the brakes several times trying to resist Alonso's attack. That front right wheel was truly squared in this final part of the race. However Raikonnen decided no to pit.
Both, Raikonnen and Alonso, were driving to their limits throughout the race. Alonso was trapped in a car mess that occurred at the first corner of the first lap. Raikonnen took advantage and then Alonso was pursuing him lap after lap. Finally, the gap between them came down from 25 sec. to 1.5 sec. and then Raikonnen's suspension went to hell ('se fue al carajo' in Alonso's words at the press conference hold at the race end). A very exciting race to see (not to say to drive, go figure!). There is full race report and images at:
http://www.formula1.com/race/news/3098/738.html
Next two races will be in Canada and the USA. Be ready for it!
Best regards,
José
The Indy on the other hand was fun to watch and Danica was fun to watch even if she made a mistake or two. Think I'd stick to road courses, going flat out just doesn't seem to be anything but scary, astounding speeds. :surprise:
Here's a summary but I'm no F1 expert, so correct me if I'm wrong. Michelin said it couldn't explain the problem with its tires (Ralf Schumacher crashed during qualifying) and recommended against using their tires on a certain high speed banked turn... so the seven (out of 10) teams using its tires said they wouldn't race unless they could use new tires or a chicane was installed to slow down speeds before that turn. FIA said no, so after the formation lap, 14 out of the 20 cars pitted and didn't race. Ferrari, Jordan, and Minardi continued racing - the latter two just to compete against each other.
I think the rules change to only allow one set of tires for qualifying and racing was meant to force teams to pace their tire use... so if the drivers are pushing too hard and their tires blow up, it's due to a faulty strategy. If Michelin-equipped teams were having tire trouble, the current set of rules were written to punish them by forcing them to drive more slowly and carefully.
But I don't know just how dangerous Michelin felt its tires were. Either way, the rules that teams should use worn tires doesn't seem like the best way to make F1 interesting again... once again it's technology over skill, and it's not the safest way to race either.
saying that the tire rules pose an uneccessary danger and IMO bear the greater part of the blame for this nonsense, although there's plenty to go around.
Can you say GPWC?
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Yes, Michelin advised his teams not to drive Indianapolis because not only Ralf Schumacher but also many other cars (among them that of the 3rd. pilot of McLaren Mercedes, Pedro de la Rosa) had their tyres in so bad condition after qualification that the risk of disintegration would have been at it most after 10 laps. Then, the pilots/teams with Michelin tyres offered to race upon condition of being allowed to change tyres or, alternatively, to place that chicane in the oval corner to reduce speed but specially lateral friction. In both cases, Michelin pilots would give up the race points to the Bridgestone teams. These would have got them according to their position at the end of the race. Thus, Michelin equipped teams would had been penalized (Bridgestone had no default tyres) but the race would had been preserved. All teams but Ferrari accepted this solution. FIA and the F1 owner, Brian Ecclestone, supported Ferrari and subsequently the real race was over.
All this is indeed very bad for F1, not only in the USA but also in Europe. In past years, some attempts have been made in order to organize a separate championship ruled by an independent association of F1 car constructors, which are not happy with Ecclestone's iron rules. Brian Ecclestone and Ferrari have always stopped this. May be now will happeen a seggregation/desintegration within the F1.
We had a very nice 24 Hours of Le Mans race, on the other hand.
Best regards,
José :confuse: :surprise:
I remember the backlash suffered by CART after they made an ill-fated visit to the Texas Motor Speedway with their 900hp+ Lolas and Reynards. The results were all too predictible. CART never really recovered from that mess.
You know, there is this track in rural Wisconsin called Road America that is just SCREAMING OUT for an F1 race...........
all 24 hours after the Aston's litteraly ran out of gas late in the race. I understand that all four cars were on the same lap after something like 20 hours, wish I'd been
around to see some of it.
Randy
By the way, Sebastian Loeb (Citröen, former World Rally Champion and leader this season) was one of the three pilots driving one of the Pescarolo prototypes that confronted Audis up to almost the end of the race. Loeb was very well adapted to the Pescarolo, but one of the team-mates of him did eventually a mistake that take the car out of the track.
Best regards,
José
PS: I am sorry I wrote Brian instead of Bernie (Ecclestone) in a former post of mine. This sort of lapsus are becoming too much frequent in me. Should I be worried? What a future awaits me? :confuse: :sick: :mad:
I hear there'll be a couple openings at the top of the Formula One organization soon...
Tony Stewart got the win, and showed that he clearly belongs in a different sort of racing (his last victory was at Watkins Glen last year, which is the only other road course in NASCAR). He even did it one-handed...he lost 4th gear, and 3rd was going, so he was forced to drive with one hand on the shifter to keep it together. Hard enough as is, but even cooler considering that he managed do this and pass Ricky Rudd to take the lead and win the race.
The IRL will soon be reduced to a near-spec series with all teams limited to Honda power and a choice between Panoz or Dallara. For those who haven't heard, "Chevrolet" (read: Cosworth) and Toyota will leave the series after 2005 and 2006 respectively.
Here is my idea for cost savings and long term viability of open wheel racing in America. Merge the two series (duh!) and radically change the rules.
The first change would involve engines. It was a nice run with turbo V8s and the ever shrinking IRL DOHC V8 package, but technology has rendered those platforms practically useless because they tend to cost too much and produce too much power. I would guess that if Honda, Ford and M-B had stayed in CART under the rules of 1995 that their engines would be producing in excess of 1000hp today. That isn't safe or sustainable.
The fix -switch to NASCAR type V8's of about 4.5-5.0 liters - carbs, pushrods and all. There are numerous NASCAR engine builders who would gladly expand their operations to build Indy engines. Don't think for one moment that Roush, Penske, Ganassi, DEI, Childress, Yates, Hendrick and whom ever it is who produces the Toyota engines for the Truck series wouldn't love to have one of their engines win Indy or the CART/IRL championship. They are competitive enough as it is. This would just fuel the fire. The apparatus is in place so why not use it?
Cars - Starting in 2007 (along with the new engine package) would be a new chassis package. With Lola, Panoz, Dallara, Reynard and anybody else interested would be allowed to submit designs for approval. Those which meet approal would be used for a three year period, much in the same way the IRL currently handles things. Downforce would be kept in check. Think early 80's March for a benchmark.
Schedule - 18 races (basically every other week from March through October) with six road courses and 12 "ovals". Tracks like Richmond would be off limits (way too small) and street courses like Denver (NO room to pass) would also be eliminated.
Thoughts?
John_324 - You know, it's funny, for as much as purists like to look down their nose at NASCAR, it's run better than any other series. I can't imagine them having a fiasco like F1 did recently....
alive even if on life support. I agree, doesn't make sense long term but how
you gonna get them to give an inch to make things better, I just don't see it.
I'll be glad to be proved wrong.
OTOH, ALMS is getting more interest and at least the Corvette's and Porsche's
are closer to real cars than most anything else on the track above SCCA/NASA.
It's fun to watch either for the faithful or for those looking to root for the underdog,
think Panoz, love that sound!
Sonoma was a fun race to watch, just when you thought it was going to be a run
away, something broke. There wasn't near as much contact for the sake of
ego as on the ovals. Just bummed me out when Kasey K. had the throttle
stick going into turn 11, ugly way to go.
Randy
Great driver's description of the road course at Sears Point. Personal
favorite is turn 6 the Carousel.
What if they actually went back to running stock production vehichles again? Would that appeal to you more or less?
The way things are now, the only similarity between the cars on the track and the cars we can own is the name.
Don't get me wrong, I still enjoy watching the Daytona 500, that's one of our yearly rites of passage to get to spring :P
But I wonder if a series of REAL stock car races would catch fan's interest?
from a Ford...
or a Pontiac...
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
So yes, make them "stock" cars again, and maybe then I'll think differently. Until then, NASCAR is off my radar screen.
Bob
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Bob
Thanks
Since I've driven in some cars at speed on track, I've got a lot more respect for anyone who pushes the limits and can concentrate to stay at that level for an extended period. Doesn't make a lot of difference on an oval or a road course. Truly amazing!
Randy
Oh, and I don't think 3000# vehicles at 200mph are going to revert to factory build spec's. NASCAR has the car of the future in testing and it is again a rolling cage with logo on the front, and that is about all we are going to see on ovals.
Posted by Steve over in Mods board and worthwhile read.
I'll share, and paraphrase. Some rich American newspaper guy got the idea to hold a grand prix in England (in like... 1903 or something) in which each country would be distinguished by a color. Italy chose black, France blue, and Belgium yellow. Then Parliament set a national speed limit of 12mph. So... the whole thing was moved to Ireland. As a mark of respect for the substitute hosts, England raced in green (no specific shade).
Italy later changed to red, Japan took white, Germany silver, etc etc.
And all was good until the '60s when an innovative Lotus won some race, but it was so innovative it needed corporate sponsorship and at that point colors went up for sale.
Vorsprung derch Technik!
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
A lot of us didn't like seeing a rolling billboard win that race.
BTW, USA racing colors wre blue and white (in combination.)
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Andy, that billboard stuff is sad, isn't it. I don't see why sponsorship has to mean a whole different base color. At least F1 Ferraris are red, and F1 Renaults are blue (but I think their blue and yellow is based on something Renault-specific).
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
Bob
-juice
Did Santa leave you a 3 or a 5 or 6??
Stop in tonight for a little post-Christmas relaxation and Mazda chat!
PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles
The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
To me, having other drivers on the course at the same time is what gives racing good spectator value. That final bit of unpredictability is what makes for the best viewing.
The other extreme, NASCAR's endless bumper to bumper mob going around in circles, doesn't do it for me. It reminds me of the Tour de France without the interesting terrain changes, or the scenery.
I like Touring Car racing the best. Anyone seen the ad at www.testofcharacter.co.uk ? Don't watch it at work.
I was just speaking with Dave Hermance and Bill Reinert, the dynamic duo behind Toyota's hybrid program in the U.S.
Mr. Reinert casually remarked that he expects hybrid powertrains to be part of Formula One by 2008. He said Bernie is all for it, and everyone knows Bernie has a way of getting what he wants. The idea would be to provide additional bursts of power when needed, like when exiting corners. Just to be crystal clear, this is one of those hybrid applications that is more about performance than fuel mileage. But imagine the PR spin possibilities:
FORMULA ONE DECIDES TO HELP SAVE THE PLANET!
Karl's blog on F1 Hybrids
2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93
MB has unveiled their 2006 F1 motor. It generates 700hp and weighs 209 lbs. That's 3.35 hp/lb of motor.
In racing (particularly F1), weight is everything. For instance, Champion was asked (directed) by F1 teams to downsize their sparkplugs starting in 1999. They've since reduced the weight from 25.9 grams to 10.7 grams. When teams are seeking ways to trim grams from sparkplugs, I don't know how receptive they'll be to the idea of the weight required for a hybrid system.
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=27&article_id=10259&page_numb- er=1
Specs on last year's cars indicated the typical weight, ready to go with driver, was around 600kg. Last years cars were making around 900hp and (if the MB motor is indicative) the current crop will be 'down' to around 700.
Weight kills you in F1.
So lets say you developed a 100hp hybrid system. At the power/weight ratio of the current MB engine, that 100hp hybrid system would weigh only about 30lbs. Frankly, I'm having a hard time picturing a 100hp hybrid system (complete with batteries) which grosses 30lbs.
Long story short if adding hybrids to F1 DECREASES my power/weight ratio (and I'm fighting that weight in turning and braking and not just accelerating), why would I go there? Unless (of course) rules changes were implemented which FORCED hybrids.
Being as tightly controled as it is, F1 is hard to predict or analyze. I think hybrid systems would have to be forced if they're going to be used, but it wouldn't surprise me if that's what happens.
It's too bad there isn't enough financial justification for an ultimate racing series. One in which "anything goes" as far as funding and technology. Maybe it could work if the teams were national teams, in a World Cup-like format. Governments love pouring money into national pride events. Might even be some trickle-down (just think of all the medical and genetic engineering stuff in the Olympics that might have practical uses). Well ok, I don't know how that'd be fun to watch without at least some sort of balancing rules.
I do enjoy watching F1, but I really hope Japan's Super GT series makes it on to TV. They say "don't make more than 500hp", but they let you do it however you want - from turbo-4 MR2's to V12 Ferraris. Variety and parity make for a good show.