2012 Canadian GP - Gilles Villeneuve

For ease of use, there is one thread per grand prix where you can discuss everything during that specific GP weekend. You can find these threads here.

Post Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:54 pm

For assorted online predictions, I'm going with Hamilton on pole and the win.

The Mclaren has power to it, which will help in the fast circuit, but also Hamilton has become a bit better in terms of race pace, mentally. He hasn't been putting tyres too off and he's been attempting to be relatively consistent in the points. The 6 races have seen him drive pretty fast, but have the worst pit incidents.

For a bit of optimism, I'm thinking that Mclaren will get their crews in gear and do everything to put Ham on top step. 7 drivers for 7 races!

Otherwise, Webber 1st, Vettel 2nd, etc. etc.; it'd be nice to get another constructor (Sauber/Lotus) to win.
RB7ate9
 
Joined: 13 Jul 2011

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:05 am

Why do you think Macca will suddenly get their act together for Canada? What have they shown which says they will be different this go?
Chuckjr
 
Joined: 24 Feb 2012

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:59 am

well they have ticked off every possible scenario to F up your driver´s life.

I´ve been sitting and thinking of new creative ways they could spoil their party but i can´t find anymore.
So with that, i´d say there quite a big chance Hamilton comes out on top here.
"Il Phenomeno" - The one they fear the most!

"2% of the world's population own 50% of the world's wealth."
Nando
 
Joined: 10 Mar 2012

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:09 pm

Nando wrote:I´ve been sitting and thinking of new creative ways they could spoil their party but i can´t find anymore.

ummmmm, apart from one of their driver stopping in the wrong box, i'd say the only thing left is a piano falling on lewis hamilton's front wing :mrgreen: , or one of the mechanic bolting spare steering wheel instead of a tire during pitsop. given what has happened in last 5 races, i am beginning to strongly expect either of those
Fuel Minimum, Engine power Maximum, Comittement Off the scane
Mafia
 
Joined: 2 Aug 2008

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:53 pm

I'm gonna go with a Hamilton pole, unless Mclaren do something wrong. Again. He's just very quick around this circuit.

Vettel to end up well down in the pecking order again? I hope so.
Felipe Baby!
SiLo
 
Joined: 25 Jul 2010

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:55 pm

Getting back somewhat to the discussion(so newer members are not confused) in the Monaco race thread about downforce levels and some people having high downforce & low downforce mixed up. Monaco is a high downforce track & Canada for instance is a low downforce track, not the other way around.

Tommy Cookers wrote:Monaco is a LOW Downforce track, because it is slow

(DF depends on the lift coefficient/wing angle and the SQUARE of the speed, so if the speed is slow the wings are set to the steepest angle/max coefficient to get the most DF available at this slow speed)


Monza is a high downforce track. Although the wings are set to a low coefficient/shallow angle, the speed is so great that the DF is higher than Monaco's. That's why low tyre pressures are a problem. The DF is so high that any more would be a problem.


Please explain this to Martin Brundle BSc, James Allen BSc and others !


Here's some quotes from drivers, Engineers & Team Principals regarding what kind of downforce track Canada is, which makes Monaco the opposite.

Canada preview quotes - Williams, McLaren, Red Bull, HRT & more

Mark Webber, Red Bull
"It’s a low-downforce track with long straights and high top speed"

Pedro de la Rosa, HRT
"We’re bringing a new low-downforce rear wing, specially designed for Canada"


Giampaolo Dall’Ara, Sauber Head of Track Engineering
"It offers interesting challenges. The first one is to find the right level of aerodynamic efficiency, because the level of downforce and drag is lower than on most of the other tracks."

Eric Boullier, Lotus Team Principal
"It’s the first low-downforce track of the season, where the E20 should be strong.”

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes
"With its low downforce and slow corners, a little bit like Monza, the track should suit our car."

Norbert Haug, Vice-President, Mercedes-Benz Motorsport

"The overall set-up compromise favours low downforce and low drag"

Heikki Kovalainen, Caterham
It’s a temporary street circuit with a couple of long straights and low downforce settings

Link
Crucial_Xtreme
 
Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Location: Charlotte

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 5:06 pm

Cheers. =D>

F1's governing body has declared illegal the 'holes' in the floor of Red Bull's 2012 car.

Rivals teams including Ferrari, McLaren and Mercedes had raised concerns about the design at Monaco last weekend, but opted not to protest on the promise that the FIA would issue a clarification prior to Canada next weekend.

"I think the regulation is quite a grey area," Red Bull's Christian Horner acknowledged to Sky Sports, "and I think a clarification will come out before Montreal that will tidy it up through a technical directive."

The crux of the highly-anticipated technical directive was reported by the German media on Saturday.

Named 013-12, the directive reportedly said there is a "misunderstanding" on the basis of a technical regulation about the meaning of a "fully enclosed hole".

It concluded that the design featured on Mark Webber's winning Monaco car is in fact not allowed.

The team and Australian Webber will keep the win, but the RB8 will have to be modified in order to pass scrutineering next weekend in Montreal.
Fuel Minimum, Engine power Maximum, Comittement Off the scane
Mafia
 
Joined: 2 Aug 2008

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 5:11 pm

Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Getting back somewhat to the discussion(so newer members are not confused) in the Monaco race thread about downforce levels and some people having high downforce & low downforce mixed up. Monaco is a high downforce track & Canada for instance is a low downforce track, not the other way around.
Tommy Cookers wrote:Monaco is a LOW Downforce track...

[...]

Monza is a high downforce track...

[...]

I can see Tommy Cookers' point.

Monaco is an inherently low-downforce circuit, which is why teams have to run a high-downforce setup. By the same token, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve is an inherently high-downforce circuit, which is why teams run a low-downforce setup.

Imagine downforce as always being the number 1 and, depending on the circuit, teams have to adjust their wings accordingly to reach exactly that number.

Tommy's nomenclature is intrinsically more accurate, but it all pretty much means the same thing at the end of the day.
bhall
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2006

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:04 pm

bhallg2k wrote:
Crucial_Xtreme wrote:Getting back somewhat to the discussion(so newer members are not confused) in the Monaco race thread about downforce levels and some people having high downforce & low downforce mixed up. Monaco is a high downforce track & Canada for instance is a low downforce track, not the other way around.
Tommy Cookers wrote:Monaco is a LOW Downforce track...

[...]

Monza is a high downforce track...

[...]

I can see Tommy Cookers' point.

Monaco is an inherently low-downforce circuit, which is why teams have to run a high-downforce setup. By the same token, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve is an inherently high-downforce circuit, which is why teams run a low-downforce setup.

Yes, I too can see what he's trying to say – unfortunately, his definitions of low and high downforce disagree with the entire rest of the F1 world. More so, his definitions of low and high downforce are pretty much useless, because they reduce to low and high speed – the faster you go, the more downforce you generate.

Tommy's nomenclature is intrinsically more accurate, but it all pretty much means the same thing at the end of the day.

I disagree, it's intrinsically less useful. Under Tommy's nomenclanture, a circuit is high downforce simply if it has a very long straight. By contrast, the normal definition allows for describing the characteristics of a very low speed circuit, but where relatively little downforce is needed (e.g. Hungary, compared to Monaco), and for describing a high speed circuit where you must still generate a large amount of downforce (e.g. Spain, as compared to Monza). Tommy categorises Hungary and Monaco in the same boat because neither has a particularly long straight, and it categorises Spain and Monza in the same boat because both have pretty enormous long straights. A useful definition (and the one used by everyone else) makes distinctions between these because you need a very different setup at them.
beelsebob
 
Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Location: Cupertino, California

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:11 pm

Accuracy and utility aren't always synonymous.

Either way, I think the protocol for referring to a track's characteristics based upon its requirement for cars else is pretty well established by now.
bhall
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2006

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:12 pm

bhallg2k wrote:Accuracy and utility aren't always synonymous.

The problem is that both are accurate, they just have different meanings.
beelsebob
 
Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Location: Cupertino, California

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 6:18 pm

I know. That's why I said accuracy isn't always synonymous with utility.

Mafia wrote:ummmmm, apart from one of their driver stopping in the wrong box, i'd say the only thing left is a piano falling on lewis hamilton's front wing :mrgreen: [...]

What? You don't think it can happen again?

Image
bhall
 
Joined: 28 Feb 2006

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 7:21 pm

bhallg2k wrote:I know. That's why I said accuracy isn't always synonymous with utility.

Mafia wrote:ummmmm, apart from one of their driver stopping in the wrong box, i'd say the only thing left is a piano falling on lewis hamilton's front wing :mrgreen: [...]

What? You don't think it can happen again?

What I love about that shot is the one red bull mechanic, litterally creased up with laughter.
beelsebob
 
Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Location: Cupertino, California

Post Sat Jun 02, 2012 9:35 pm

Chuckjr wrote:Why do you think Macca will suddenly get their act together for Canada? What have they shown which says they will be different this go?

Canada is a high point for the team from last year. They're going to want to put in the extra effort to overcome the past faults. They haven't "shown" anything different (I, unfortunately, don't have access to the pit crew training schedule or to the principles) but the track does favor the Macs, Mercs, and Lotus. If they can get the pits right, Maclaren has a driver that handles changing conditions (Button) and a good driver in the full wet/dry (Hamilton). With the single DRS zone, straight-line speed off-the-bat will be important to aid in overtaking/defending.
RB7ate9
 
Joined: 13 Jul 2011

Post Sun Jun 03, 2012 2:36 am

Chuckjr wrote:Why do you think Macca will suddenly get their act together for Canada? What have they shown which says they will be different this go?

They don't need to up their game, just need to demonstrate a normal form and it should give them lots of points. They have been really abnormal so far.
foxmulder_ms
 
Joined: 10 Feb 2011

PreviousNext

Return to Formula One races

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests