Well, Danny set fastest lap, Kimi had a mechanical DNF and Bottas was stuck behind Vettel for a lot of the race so, I'm unsure how much we can get from the overall rankings.
Well, Danny set fastest lap, Kimi had a mechanical DNF and Bottas was stuck behind Vettel for a lot of the race so, I'm unsure how much we can get from the overall rankings.
Grosjean is so freaking frustrating to watch.
Haven't seen anyone talk about what the Miami track would look like- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxpUnoJI_dc
Having vacationed in Miami, and gone over to the cruise port more than once- it's a VERY interesting (and that's not interesting in a good way, BTW) track. Not sure how they think the pits can be in the BB arena parking area. Or that the walking areas there will make a decent track surface.
In reply to alfadriver :
This will probably go the way of the NYC track.
In reply to markwemple :
I don't know about that- listening to the F1 talking heads, they have a LOT in common with Miami. Or at least think they do. This may be a place they force it to work.
It's more like the Valencia race in terms of going downtown and through a port, but with all the "glitz" and whatnot of Miami. Given the number of exotic cars you see in Miami, they are not 100% wrong, either. There is way more money there than in a port city in Spain.
AND it's not as if this same "track" hasn't been used already- by multiple series.
It always comes down to money. If there's someone who wants it badly enough to pay the money to make it work, then it'll happen. I wouldn't hold my breath, though.
I wonder how the people in Austin view another race in Miami? They can't be thrilled about the idea. A race in Miami isn't a horrible idea, but not in 2019. Maybe get your ducks in a row and shoot for 2020.
ncjay said:I wonder how the people in Austin view another race in Miami? They can't be thrilled about the idea. A race in Miami isn't a horrible idea, but not in 2019. Maybe get your ducks in a row and shoot for 2020.
As an F1 fan who lives in Austin (I know you were directing that more at the track owners), I'm torn. I always thought Austin was a good spot for a US Grand Prix because the weather is (typically....) mild and it's in the center of the country making it equal distance, regardless of which coast you live on. As a fan, I think that another GP in the US could be a good thing to increase F1's popularity here. I think it would sell out, but cities are notorious for changing their minds when it doesn't turn out to be as lucrative or you end up having a change in political leadership. I'm torn because pulling F1 from Austin could potentially hurt a track that seems to be struggling, anyway. While I'd love to see COTA around for a long time, in my heart I'm afraid it'll die off when the current (10 years?) F1 contract ends.
-Rob
In reply to rob_lewis :
I think Miami is additional. I doubt F1 would pull the race at COTA unless the locals stopped ponying up the dough.
That is pretty likely.
Miami is an additional race, not a replacement. With Liberty at the helm I'd expect a third (probably West Coast) race within a few years as well. They are determined to expand F1's reach into North America and especially the US.
So while I think we can all agree the HALO is an ugly device, hopefully we can end the discussion over weather it should be on the cars or not. F2 added HALO's this year as well as F1 and in this weekends F2 support race for the GP it got it's first real world test. Tadasuke Makino has the dubious honor of the HALO preventing serisous injury or worse when the rear of Nirei Fukuzumi car came up and over Tadasuke's car and the rear wheel tire would have directly impacted his head if not for the HALO.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4lZEwfaLNbE" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Crap, I 'm doing something wrong trying to embed a youtube vid. How do you do it again?
In reply to Adrian_Thompson : If it's all about safety, then why even have open wheel cars? Think about the DTM car, it's essentially a Open wheel car with a car cover.
In reply to trigun7469 :
That kind of logic isn't' worth discussing. I'll let you have your way of seeing the world. I'll stick with mine.
trigun7469 said:In reply to Adrian_Thompson : If it's all about safety, then why even have open wheel cars? Think about the DTM car, it's essentially a Open wheel car with a car cover.
Why go to the extreme for the discussion? If you want 100% safety, there should be no racing at all, which is silly.
The halo is really ugly, no doubt. But it's also a pretty simple way to keep the cars open, with open wheels, and make if *safer* for the driver. Not perfectly safe, but safer. And improving safety is a good thing.
I guess I'm the freak in the room, but I don't really find it all that unattractive. If what FI says about having to unexpectedly build a whole new set of chassis is true, then I'm not really a fan from a cost-containment perspective, but I don't really care what they look and sound like, I just want to see good racing.
In reply to alfadriver : How is it extreme? Nothing is 100% safe, but when the serious injuries in open wheeling racing have been as a result of head injuries, why take the slow way to evolve when the technology is available? All prototypes in sportscars have tops and windshields. It's hard to believe that this won't all eventually evolve into a closed cockpit car. There is plenty of designs out there for F1 and indycar with a enclosed cockpit.
Simply adopting the LMP1 ruleset would make things interesting - and if Porsche is to be believed, faster. Open wheel and open cockpit race cars are a throwback to before aero was understood. If you were setting out to make the fastest possible racer, you wouldn't even consider it.
Keith Tanner said:Simply adopting the LMP1 ruleset would make things interesting - and if Porsche is to be believed, faster. Open wheel and open cockpit race cars are a throwback to before aero was understood. If you were setting out to make the fastest possible racer, you wouldn't even consider it.
The open wheels are a huge source of drag, so yeah, the engineers would love to be allowed to cover them up.
That said, the 919 at Spa wasn't even close to being legal under the LMP1 ruleset. :) It was a demo lap running without rules, so they tweaked the car to have 40% more engine power, 20% more electric power, 60% more downforce, and a bunch of weight reduction.
I know the 919 Evo is a modified LMP1. But it shows that with some tweaks, the endurance racer isn't any slower than an F1 car. F1 races aren't even long enough for a real test session of a WEC racer, so there's all sorts of low hanging fruit to make the car faster if you're okay with it only running for 1/12th of a full length race.
But look at the variety the LMP1 rules got us. Three different types of energy storage. Two different fuels. Completely different engine designs and powertrain layouts for each team. Cars that can race flat out for 24 hours. Cars that can pass each other. And cars that have been proven to be safe in 200 mph crashes. It's a far more successful rule set than F1, and the only reason it can't be used for F1 is because for some reason we think the pinnacle of racing technology should be based around 1930's body designs.
trigun7469 said:In reply to alfadriver : How is it extreme? Nothing is 100% safe, but when the serious injuries in open wheeling racing have been as a result of head injuries, why take the slow way to evolve when the technology is available? All prototypes in sportscars have tops and windshields. It's hard to believe that this won't all eventually evolve into a closed cockpit car. There is plenty of designs out there for F1 and indycar with a enclosed cockpit.
So I may have read more into it, but it is extreme that you are suggesting that open wheel racing end. And for F1 and Indy car, is on the extreme side.
In reply to alfadriver : Deltawing almost made it a reality for Indycar.
You telling me that this
Looks better then this?
it's not an open wheel car, and kind of defeats the purpose.
What is the purpose it is defeating? Why does F1 have to be open wheel? We got rid of carburetors and mechanical fuel pumps years ago.
Early grand prix cars didn't have to be open wheel:
If you want closed wheel racing, there's plenty of it already out there- why re-invent that? Seems rather redundant.
And I'm not sure how you relate the technology steps from carbs to fuel injection as similar to covering the open wheels. One is technology advance, the other is something else (whatever you want to call it)- but it's very much not related to tech.
You'll need to log in to post.
