Ray wrote:ISLAMATRON wrote:Alonso did nothin but make excuses for his inability to outrace a rookie and blame it on the team. It was not politics that made Alonso use his car as a lawnmower in Canada or a pinball in Japan. Alonso could have been in a championship level car last year, but it is more important for him to be the number 1 driver than to have a good car under him. HAmilton & Massa speak their mind... its just that their minds arent full of --- like Alonso's is. We've heard Alonso bad mouth every team & nearly every teammate he's ever had.
I suppose you're supposed to tow the company line and lie like Hammy? Please.
freedom_honda wrote:I've heard that the BrawnGP gearbox was over-torqued at the start. Can anyone explain what does it mean by "over-torqued"?
Shaddock wrote:In layman’s terms, he revved the nuts off engine, dropped the clutch, and the jolt broke something in the gearbox.
WhiteBlue wrote:Shaddock wrote:In layman’s terms, he revved the nuts off engine, dropped the clutch, and the jolt broke something in the gearbox.
That is not what I make of DaveKillens's post. I understand that Rubens (and obviously his race engineer) selected different gear ratios compared to Buttons car. What I do not immediately understand is how the start automatic reacts when you have higher gear ratios to screw your start. Those cars are supposed to start automatically when the driver drops the clutch. Did Rubens have too much wheel spin or did the box lift the clutch again because he did not have enough revs?
WhiteBlue wrote:If you understand the start mechanism perhaps you can explain how it works to stall a car with over torque? F1 boxes have gear ratios and lets assume they took indeed a ratio too high. If one of the dogs broke I could understand that Rubens lost seventh gear. But how did that also ruin his start?
DaveKillens wrote:I am of the opinion the anti-stall software received a high torque value and was fooled into believing the car was going backwards.
Users browsing this forum: Websta and 1 guest