DIET.............................................COKESawtooth-spike wrote:The most important thing is...
How will the sponers respond to havin there adverts split in 2 on the back wing?
Having a viewpoint is one thing, but I find banging on and on about it gets depressing.manchild wrote:Scuderia_Russ,
I don’t see why you are taking this personally. Different people have different viewpoints. Why should I overlook fact that AMD is partner with both FIA and Ferrari? I have my views and reasons to suspect events that occur.
Sorry Manchild but you're not Michael Moore. There are no cover ups and no conspiracies that need unearthing. You don't like Ferrari, Michael Schumacher or the F.I.A. and you continue unsubjective rants againt all of these parties. My replies to these comments have been just as unsubjective, I admit and I know this as I write every word, simply to try and show you that there are two sides to every story. This is why I might have appeared to some to be a "Ferrari freak" and that M.S. was my "shining light". I admire the guy for his determination and achievements don't get me wrong but I would rather see the sport succeed and prosper with some top quality close racing than to see Ferrari and/or M.S. trounce the field as some might think.manchild wrote:If you think that I feel comfortable on this forum or that I like most of the posts that you’re wrong. I often get annoyed and frustrated like “Michael Moore on republican convention in Texas” but I’m not telling others to stop writing what they think.
manchild wrote:Since both of us including the others can only speculate what is the truth until it is revealed different views will exist.
I am with the other in saying that this could be the most inovative and impressive ruling to come out of the FIA in quite some time (ever?) By placing the rear wing in a area of turbulent flow then the max downforce achieveable will be limited and if rear downforce is limited then the front has to be reduced to keep the car ballanced. Whilst reduced downforce may case slightly increased top spees it will reduce cornering speed (regained by slicks) but most importantly increase stopping distance. This will allow 2 (or more) cars side by side in the braking zone with the better driver (chassis) being able to utilise the sticker tyers to greater effect.Spensifer_Murphy wrote:And just another thought...Turbulant air...bad for wings trying to make downforce...hence the 2003 engine cover designs. So what happens when we mount rear wings Directly behind turbulange generating rear wheels?! Its madness! We'll endup with skitish rear-ends and car spinning everywhere. Unless they add more wing attack angle...guess what...that means more drag...which means more turbulance...which not only is exactly what we are trying to reduce...it also means LESS top speed on the straights...weren't the FIA trying to reduce speeds a while back???
Because AMD is only technical partner to Ferrari - no other team.Cyco wrote:...Manchild: Why is it that Ferrari will benifit from AMD's assosiation with the FIA? Surely they arn't the only team to have an assosiation with them.
Manchild, I have been absolutely disgusted with the FIA over the past few year witth what I see as blatant favoritism, in many respects, towards ferrari.Because AMD is only technical partner to Ferrari - no other team.
That is one company whose computers are doing CFD of Formula 1 car for both technical partners (FIA&Ferrari) and I'm sure they don't hide informations from each other.
Users browsing this forum: SEMrush [Bot] and 0 guests