Australian GP 2008

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 Reply
donskar
2
Joined: 03 Feb 2007, 16:41
Location: Cardboard box, end of Boulevard of Broken Dreams
Contact:

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

As a Ferrari fan (so beware my biase), I was disappointed in the results of the race. More important, as an F1 fan I was disappointed and at points so bored that I began reading a book during the race.

Sadly agree completely with checkered:
"To the degree it wasn't even funny anymore, pole equals win."
I know that some members of this forum are very adept with stats - can someone post the percentage of winners over the past few years who started from pole? Yes, I do love the technology (but there seem to be more and more restrictions on that element of the sport) and I do love the visceral elements - the sounds and the spectacle - but *!^#$!# there is just so LITTLE RACING involved in winning an F1 race. Yes, there was some very exciting racing going on mid-field, but ultimately we had ANOTHER race whose winner passed no one on the road.

Maybe the lack of TC will actually be a positive in this sense: in prior years one could have said that Hamilton won because he 1) started from pole and 2) had the best car. Now, the absence of TC will put a somewhat higher premium on driver skill. But I sense that I'm grasping at straws.

Agree with manchild: one thread per race seems to make sense.

Finally, I'm afraid the ECU issue will become this year's Stepneygate. I spent 21 years in American computer companies from huge (Honeywell, DEC, Compaq, Hewlett Packard) to smallest startups you've never heard of, so gained some knowledge of software. And I know first hand the complexity of "tuning" an ECU. Therefore, I regretfully agree with Ray:
And if you think mapping is mapping you obviously haven't dealt with a Ford EMC versus a Chevrolet or Dodge ECM. Just to test your theory I would like you to take a Dodge ECU and a Ford TCM and get them to play nice. Load the Ford engine map into that Dodge ECU, still running the same engine with all the wiring mated correctly, and see how well it works. You won't have a chance in hell and you and anyone who has tried knows it. They had to redo their whole control systems from stem to stern to redo the code for the tranny, the injector drivers, the spark maps, the tranny mode selections on the steering wheels. I highly doubt they are even coded in the same language (computer wise). Who knows how MES structures their ECUs? Then they had to optimize it, and in a car like an F1 car that's going to be a huge undertaking. I would guess it would take every bit of a year to get it to work, function correctly reliably, and then when that is done try an make it competitive. Keep in mind your competition does not have to over come any of these hurdles, and that is a huge part of a race team. You can't won a race if your car won't start.
The ECU of the humble Nissan SR20 (2 liter inline 4 without variable valve timing) is beyond nearly every tuner in the USA - and this is one of the most popular engines among US tuners/drifters. Imagine the greater complexity of an F1 ECU! It is technically quite POSSIBLE that McLaren has a sizable advantage thanks to their joint development of the ECU. And last season cast more than a little doubt on McLaren's ethics.
Enzo Ferrari was a great man. But he was not a good man. -- Phil Hill

Belatti
33
Joined: 10 Jul 2007, 21:48
Location: Argentina

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

Ciro Pabón wrote:I also dare to say that I have the impression that winning on a dominant car has no... grace, if I may take the idiom from spanish. I might be in a minory in this point, but certainly I'm not alone.
You are not, Ciro.
Also remember Hamilton is relatively new, did Schumacher do the corny jump in 1994? Give some time to the kid.

Kubica: I agree with Fazzini, his strategy was wrong, good qualy but pitting early always mess up your race.

Bourdais: I think Seba did very good (please dont start with the: "oh he only was benefited because retirements") as it was his first race (vini, vidi, only vinci missing... lets see with a better car) he needed to stay calm, drive a good distance and earn experience and thats what he did: stayed out of problems, I like Bergers quote:
fighting with the best he managed to keep his position even towards the end on old tyres. He made no mistakes, reading the race in the right way from beginning to end
Thats what Alonso does better, too: "reading the race in the right way from beginning to end" and did in this opportunity.
BTW: does someone know what happened to Heikki in the straight when battling with Alonso?
The last safety car spoiled Heikki but I think he was fast with his new McLaren, he will do better I think.

Honda didnt look as bad as many supposed.
The Force India either.
Toyota was there, Williams, too. It was a good result for Nico and Kazuki did good, too. I think he is different (better) from the average Japanese driver many expect to see.

Piquet Jr... well... it has been said that his achievements where fruits from working hard, not talent, that it takes time for him to get to grips with a car, so I think he´ll improve later in the season, but remember F1 has little if no patience.

donskar: are you joking? the race was never boring, it was pretty entertaining to me, I love new NO-TC F1, it seems like anyone can score points (and lots can score wins this year)
"You need great passion, because everything you do with great pleasure, you do well." -Juan Manuel Fangio

"I have no idols. I admire work, dedication and competence." -Ayrton Senna

User avatar
Ray
2
Joined: 22 Nov 2006, 06:33
Location: Atlanta

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

donskar wrote:Finally, I'm afraid the ECU issue will become this year's Stepneygate. I spent 21 years in American computer companies from huge (Honeywell, DEC, Compaq, Hewlett Packard) to smallest startups you've never heard of, so gained some knowledge of software. And I know first hand the complexity of "tuning" an ECU. Therefore, I regretfully agree with Ray:
And if you think mapping is mapping you obviously haven't dealt with a Ford EMC versus a Chevrolet or Dodge ECM. Just to test your theory I would like you to take a Dodge ECU and a Ford TCM and get them to play nice. Load the Ford engine map into that Dodge ECU, still running the same engine with all the wiring mated correctly, and see how well it works. You won't have a chance in hell and you and anyone who has tried knows it. They had to redo their whole control systems from stem to stern to redo the code for the tranny, the injector drivers, the spark maps, the tranny mode selections on the steering wheels. I highly doubt they are even coded in the same language (computer wise). Who knows how MES structures their ECUs? Then they had to optimize it, and in a car like an F1 car that's going to be a huge undertaking. I would guess it would take every bit of a year to get it to work, function correctly reliably, and then when that is done try an make it competitive. Keep in mind your competition does not have to over come any of these hurdles, and that is a huge part of a race team. You can't won a race if your car won't start.
The ECU of the humble Nissan SR20 (2 liter inline 4 without variable valve timing) is beyond nearly every tuner in the USA - and this is one of the most popular engines among US tuners/drifters. Imagine the greater complexity of an F1 ECU! It is technically quite POSSIBLE that McLaren has a sizable advantage thanks to their joint development of the ECU. And last season cast more than a little doubt on McLaren's ethics.
It's not so much tuning an ECU that is the problem. I hope that's not what cam across in my post. Tuning is not the problem. there is not an ECU and engine that can't be tuned to perfection. It's the fact that they had to change from theirs to someone elses having no experience on it. THAT's the problem for them. They have to adapt to the new system first, then they can tune it.

CMSMJ1
Moderator
Joined: 25 Sep 2007, 10:51
Location: Chesterfield, United Kingdom

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

Ray wrote:Can someone pleas explain to me exactly what constitutes yielding a spot to someone passing you? Cause for fuc*s sake no one here seems to think like me. DC lost that corner and cut off Massa. Then was childish about it! Are they racing Formula 1 cars or playing goddamn pattycake?

Massa:
Outbraked DC after drafting him down the straight
Had the preferred inside line for quite a ways after initial hit of the brakes
Took away DCs choice of turn in on the preferred line of the corner
Was more than halfway up the side of DC into the corner

DC:
Got outbraked
turned in on Massa
blamed his shitty driving on Massa
Cutting him off made it look like Massa rammed him, where was Massa supposed to go?

Massa had every advantage on DC into that corner and he shut the door on him. He did nothing wrong and I don't see how anyone can blame him for what happened. DC has no room or right to DEMAND Massa take blame for this. He wasn't even remotely close to Wurz last year. Hell Wurz was already turning in, almost to the apex, when DC hit him. Almost killed the guy in the process. I know it's a different corner, and different circumstances. But he had none of the advantages over Wurz that Massa had over him I'm losing respect for him more and more every race.
My take on this overtake was that Massa was too far back and was already on the grass on the inside when DC took his line.

Massa should have realised he cannot bully past DC like he did to Nakajima earlier and perhaps DC should have ceded as he acknowledged a faster Ferrari behind him.

It is a racing incident plain and simple.

Overall though - I enjoyed the race and was impressed by Le Seb and also Alonso. Both did a good job in their respective circumstances.

(edit for my bad typos)
Last edited by CMSMJ1 on 17 Mar 2008, 17:23, edited 1 time in total.
IMPERATOR REX ANGLORUM

DaveKillens
34
Joined: 20 Jan 2005, 04:02

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

I don't have a problem with this scenario, because it's by the rules. But Kimi, retires before the end, gets an engine change without penalty, yet scores a point?
Personally, I would prefer an alteration to the rules, where you have to be running at the end to score points.
Racing should be decided on the track, not the court room.

sebbe
0
Joined: 17 May 2006, 19:27
Location: Argentina

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

Belatti wrote:BTW: does someone know what happened to Heikki in the straight when battling with Alonso?
The last safety car spoiled Heikki but I think he was fast with his new McLaren, he will do better I think.
I managed to get past Fernando but then as I tore off a visor strip on the main straight I accidentally hit the pit lane speed limiter button and Fernando managed to get past me again. (Kovy)
"I've already altered the deal, pray I don't alter it any further" -Darth Vader to Lando Calrissian. The Empire Strikes Back.
"Progress is not always made by reasonable men." (McLaren Racing).
"We have optimised the lateral optical interface of the building." (Translation: "My factory has a lot of windows.") Ron Dennis.-

Belatti
33
Joined: 10 Jul 2007, 21:48
Location: Argentina

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

So McLaren has to improve the Steering wheel layout... first Hamilton in Brazil 2007 and now Kovy :roll:
"You need great passion, because everything you do with great pleasure, you do well." -Juan Manuel Fangio

"I have no idols. I admire work, dedication and competence." -Ayrton Senna

Conceptual
0
Joined: 15 Nov 2007, 03:33

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

Belatti wrote:So McLaren has to improve the Steering wheel layout... first Hamilton in Brazil 2007 and now Kovy :roll:

Better that than what I immediately thought, and that was Briatore intervention!

Chris

allan
0
Joined: 14 Jan 2006, 22:14
Location: Waterloo, Canada

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

how come everybody is talking about kimi and forgetting S. Bourdais?
didnt he retire? didnt he claim 2 points(not 1!) ???
u guys are halarious sometimes.... some of u have been watching, or claim to, f1 for years and years and now u pretend that u've never seen this thing happening at the end of a race before...

User avatar
rkn
2
Joined: 26 Jun 2006, 09:58

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

Did any one notice 6 levers behind the McLaren steering wheel? Where there previously was only one gear lever, there are now 2, the clutch levers are as usual further down. Ill try to find a picture!

EDIT:

Image

You can see that there are two different levers there, during the race you could see that he used the upper one for gearchanges. Again it is not the clutch as in a better pic, you could see it is further down.

Conceptual
0
Joined: 15 Nov 2007, 03:33

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

rkn wrote:Did any one notice 6 levers behind the McLaren steering wheel? Where there previously was only one gear lever, there are now 2, the clutch levers are as usual further down. Ill try to find a picture!

EDIT:

Image

You can see that there are two different levers there, during the race you could see that he used the upper one for gearchanges. Again it is not the clutch as in a better pic, you could see it is further down.
Left to right front brake bias? That would be ingenious! Maybe left/right diff bias?

Unless, they are programmed for the start sequence.

Chris

User avatar
Ray
2
Joined: 22 Nov 2006, 06:33
Location: Atlanta

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

Conceptual wrote:
Left to right front brake bias? That would be ingenious! Maybe left/right diff bias?

Unless, they are programmed for the start sequence.

Chris
I thought brake bias had to be changed mechanically with no electronic adjusting mechanisms allowed. If that were a brake bias lever it would be very hard to do it that way without breaking the rules.

mx_tifoso
0
Joined: 30 Nov 2006, 05:01
Location: North America
Contact:

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

Ray wrote:I thought brake bias had to be changed mechanically with no electronic adjusting mechanisms allowed. If that were a brake bias lever it would be very hard to do it that way without breaking the rules.
Be careful with what you say, as P_O_L might read this and accuse McLaren once more of doing something either wrong or illegal. :roll:

Something that has happened quite often, which has then lead to unfortunate events in many threads. A really tiring situation, to me at least.
Forum guide: read before posting

"You do it, then it's done." - Kimi Räikkönen

Por las buenas soy amigo, por las malas soy campeón.

User avatar
Ray
2
Joined: 22 Nov 2006, 06:33
Location: Atlanta

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

:D

I would go ahead and say Lewis and McLaren have my vote for WDC and WCC. Even though I'm pulling for Mark Webber and Kimi. That's saying alot since I don't remotely like Lewis and I'm not a huge fan of McLaren after Kimi left.

Let's hope that isn't a brake bias lever that circumvents the rules. Another controversy would surely turn me off F1 again this year. Last year I really hated F1 for the spy BS. Racing and the cars are the only interest for me, I couldn't take all that again.

Besides, if it is an illegal mechanism, how would Ferrari know about it. They already fired Stepny! :lol:

allan
0
Joined: 14 Jan 2006, 22:14
Location: Waterloo, Canada

Re: [GP Australia 2008] Race analysis

Post

i saw that , and the only way i could think of to explain it is shifting speed..
Press both pedals and u'll engage a seemless shift (decrease gearbox life), or just a single pedal from either side and u'll engage a slightly slower gearshift in order to maximize gearbox life... it can work the other way around too, i don't know, does it make sense?

Post Reply