Jump to content Jump to content

2018 Ripper Aussie Grand Prix


MBKF1

Recommended Posts

  • Moderator
That was a brilliant first race! That's just luck I guess, it goes one way and the other, and today Vettel got lucky and Mercedes lost out.

What a shame for Haas though, couldn't believe it the first time but when Grosjean stopped... such a shame.

Verstappen looked sloppy all day too, I was really disappointed by him. Wobbling about everywhere and getting frustrated in traffic, eventually spinning.

Bring on Bahrain!
Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy with the result of course, but having said that, Mercedes are still easily the fastest. Which is scary considering the Ferrari was faster at Melbourne last season and still lost out over the year. Vettel was something like 7 seconds back from Lewis before the stops...

And honestly I've never heard a complaint about the VSC before Crofty mentioned it on Sky, certainly didn't hear it in Spain last year. 
Link to post
Share on other sites
Lukedfrt said:
Mclaren's decision to dump Honda is looking like a very good move now. 
Bit early to say IMO. Sure, they got a 5th place but if Honda sort out their problems this year, I still think it could be a bad long term decision. Red Bull may well have a good works engine for 2019/2020 and then ride it to the titles with their great chassis, whilst McLaren could still be in 5th or 6th place every race. 
Link to post
Share on other sites
AMS97KRR said:
And honestly I've never heard a complaint about the VSC before Crofty mentioned it on Sky, certainly didn't hear it in Spain last year. 
Agreed. Things are only ever a crime in this sport when they go in Vettel's favour. 

The fan voice has also changed back to Vettel being the luckiest driver ever again, when he was on the receiving end of near enough all the reliability problems in last year's title race. There will always be some BS narrative to promote. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought is was a deserved win for Vettel after all the stuff he went through last year. I hope Fearri are able to gain all they can out of their design bringing into title contention. There are gains that they can make possibly making it better then Mercedes. And also Vettel did no overtaking under VSC, I don’t know people are saying that.
Link to post
Share on other sites
AMS97KRR said:
Lukedfrt said:
Mclaren's decision to dump Honda is looking like a very good move now. 
Bit early to say IMO. Sure, they got a 5th place but if Honda sort out their problems this year, I still think it could be a bad long term decision. Red Bull may well have a good works engine for 2019/2020 and then ride it to the titles with their great chassis, whilst McLaren could still be in 5th or 6th place every race. 
Yeah they have plenty of time to turn it around but, Torro Rosso had a nightmare weekend from what i saw.. slowest car other than Sauber and then another Power Unit failure. 
Winter testing looked very good for Honda, as it equally looked very bad for Mclaren, but the race showed that they still haven't sorted the engine problems out for the 4th year in succession.
Link to post
Share on other sites
VetteIfan said:
AMS97KRR said:
And honestly I've never heard a complaint about the VSC before Crofty mentioned it on Sky, certainly didn't hear it in Spain last year. 
Agreed. Things are only ever a crime in this sport when they go in Vettel's favour. 

The fan voice has also changed back to Vettel being the luckiest driver ever again, when he was on the receiving end of near enough all the reliability problems in last year's title race. There will always be some BS narrative to promote. 

Yeah, I take back what I said yesterday in the heat of the moment. Wasn't fair on my part.
Link to post
Share on other sites
This was so boring that I forgot to post about it here. Exceptionally good fortune for Vettel doesn't hide the depressing reality that Mercedes is much better than everybody else and that Hamilton is driving like someone who clearly is one of the best drivers of all time.

And Red Bull was so disappointing, especially Max, literally his worst race in his open-wheel career.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Red Bull were quick though, Ricciardo might well have challenged for the lead if he was able to clear Raikkonen quickly. 

Max didn't have a great race but then he wasn't slow, just a bit rusty. Again, he couldn't overtake due to the nature of the cars. He might have challenged the Ferrari's without that spin. We could have some great battles between those 4 going forward.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If Mercedes dominates again which I would so HATE to see happen even though they look to be the strongest, the rules need to go back the Naturally aspirated engines to make it less complicated. Give us V8's or V10's! Hopefully Mercedes lose the reliability battle and get penalized every five races, LOL!
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
Sorry guys, but there's no chance we're going back to natural aspiration or upping the cylinder count. From an engineering standpoint, it makes no sense to go backwards. The current engines actually sound alright when you're at the track, even if they are a little quiet. But let's just be grateful we have some noise, as it'll go all electric eventually.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Why would that be going backwards? Instead of making the actual engine cheaper they cut corners by only giving teams 3. That is what I call going backwards. They need at least 6+ engines so that they can push maximum every lap of every race.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
Why would that be going backwards? Instead of making the actual engine cheaper they cut corners by only giving teams 3. That is what I call going backwards. They need at least 6+ engines so that they can push maximum every lap of every race.
Are car companies making engines bigger, or are they making them smaller and more efficient?

The specifics of the detail may be rubbish, such as the 3 engine limit, but small turbo engines are what we're stuck with.

Look at Ford. The new GT has a V6. The new Fiesta ST is a 3 cylinder. All normal Fiestas have 1 litre 3 cylinder petrols, yet you still get 140BHP!
Link to post
Share on other sites
fIsince08 said:
Why would that be going backwards? Instead of making the actual engine cheaper they cut corners by only giving teams 3. That is what I call going backwards. They need at least 6+ engines so that they can push maximum every lap of every race.
Are car companies making engines bigger, or are they making them smaller and more efficient?

The specifics of the detail may be rubbish, such as the 3 engine limit, but small turbo engines are what we're stuck with.

Look at Ford. The new GT has a V6. The new Fiesta ST is a 3 cylinder. All normal Fiestas have 1 litre 3 cylinder petrols, yet you still get 140BHP!
If you pay extra ;) Mine has the standard 100BHP because I didn't want to pay even more each month, but it still goes plenty fast enough for me. It gets to 60 way quicker than the 1.6l Focus I had before it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
fIsince08 said:
Why would that be going backwards? Instead of making the actual engine cheaper they cut corners by only giving teams 3. That is what I call going backwards. They need at least 6+ engines so that they can push maximum every lap of every race.
Are car companies making engines bigger, or are they making them smaller and more efficient?

The specifics of the detail may be rubbish, such as the 3 engine limit, but small turbo engines are what we're stuck with.

Look at Ford. The new GT has a V6. The new Fiesta ST is a 3 cylinder. All normal Fiestas have 1 litre 3 cylinder petrols, yet you still get 140BHP!
Yes but this is Formula 1 we are talking about here. It doesn’t need to be relatable to our road cars because nobody cares that they have something similar to an open wheel car. If it was touring cars I can see how you would want your road car to be relatable because that is the DNA of Touring. I don’t think you need that in F1.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
fIsince08 said:
Why would that be going backwards? Instead of making the actual engine cheaper they cut corners by only giving teams 3. That is what I call going backwards. They need at least 6+ engines so that they can push maximum every lap of every race.
Are car companies making engines bigger, or are they making them smaller and more efficient?

The specifics of the detail may be rubbish, such as the 3 engine limit, but small turbo engines are what we're stuck with.

Look at Ford. The new GT has a V6. The new Fiesta ST is a 3 cylinder. All normal Fiestas have 1 litre 3 cylinder petrols, yet you still get 140BHP!
Yes but this is Formula 1 we are talking about here. It doesn’t need to be relatable to our road cars because nobody cares that they have something similar to an open wheel car. If it was touring cars I can see how you would want your road car to be relatable because that is the DNA of Touring. I don’t think you need that in F1.
If you want manufacturers in the sport, it has to be a worthwhile investment - i.e. they need to get something out of it. That's why it needs to be relevant to the road. I'd actually argue F1 is more road relatable than touring cars. Traction control, ABS, hybrids and, going way back, turbochargers all really came to fruition on the road because they proved valuable in F1.

fIsince08 said:
Why would that be going backwards? Instead of making the actual engine cheaper they cut corners by only giving teams 3. That is what I call going backwards. They need at least 6+ engines so that they can push maximum every lap of every race.
Are car companies making engines bigger, or are they making them smaller and more efficient?

The specifics of the detail may be rubbish, such as the 3 engine limit, but small turbo engines are what we're stuck with.

Look at Ford. The new GT has a V6. The new Fiesta ST is a 3 cylinder. All normal Fiestas have 1 litre 3 cylinder petrols, yet you still get 140BHP!
If you pay extra ;) Mine has the standard 100BHP because I didn't want to pay even more each month, but it still goes plenty fast enough for me. It gets to 60 way quicker than the 1.6l Focus I had before it.
Ha, yes I did know that but I was making a point :)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...