Crash.Net User: 107SS2009

Comments rating: -3442
Position in rating: 7736

Show Comments on:


June 18, 2015 12:44 PM

F1 » Embattled Alonso urges McLaren to focus on reliability

Vincero, Reliability contrary to many believe has hit all 4 manufacturers of course to a different degree, while some has managed to avoid it during qualifying and race some did not, while 2 has managed to get on top of it by reliability upgrades the other 2 did not as regards the components usage penalty up to now, as things stands at the moment Honda seems to be the worst off, but no doubt that they too will get on top of it, one interesting thing that that is not spoken about is that for Renault this year is the second cycle of reliability problems after getting on top of it last year, the cause (buck) stops with RBR having forced Renault to use unproved updated PU right at the start of the season in Australia.


June 18, 2015 11:52 AM

F1 » Button: Don't discount our background developments

107SS2009: Rumours have been circulating that at the Canadian GP weekend a number of meetings took place where options for RB and TR to become FERRARI engine customers in 2017 at a cost of 18 million per season each were discussed in detail. If this dial materialises, will RB or TR ever be able to win a championship being a customer team?. Mclaren is suffering some of the biggest pain ever seen in F1 exactly to avoid just that, being a customer by ditching the Mercedes PU supply.
Both RBR and STR know how to build a better chassis and optimise aero better than FERRARI so who knows...maybe!
Go tell that one to the Colgate Kid


June 18, 2015 8:39 AM

F1 » Button: Don't discount our background developments

dorkbert, “I heard through the grapevine that they are working on/redesigning a totally new PU for next year”. And I read through the rules that for next year (2016) the number of frozen items will increase from the 3 frozen items this year and then stay the same in 2017, will increase again in 2018, and again in 2019. Frozen items in 2016 that will be added to the 3 frozen this year are, upper/lower crankcase, all dimensions, cylinder bore position, water core, drive from ancillary to power source including position of drive, valve gear train including position and geometry, dumpers, valve drive-camshaft lobe to gear train and geometry, covers closing the areas in contact with engine oil, camshaft and timing covers.


June 17, 2015 9:52 PM

F1 » Button: Don't discount our background developments

nihi.swann.7: The McLaren media machine clearly has a 'positive spin only boys' mandate this year. Lets face it, McLaren has lost the plot. How many terrible years in a row is this now? They talk a good talk, but results speak a different language If talking positive wins races, Eric would have been world champ for the past decade. Its remarkable though how Button manages to give an interview through such very tightly clenched jaws.
The difference between talking positive and talking negative, “when you can’t solve a problem, manage it” talking positive one has a better chance to manage a problem, while talking negative one has zero chance of solving the problem. Talking positive is preferred to that of the RB response to the Renault problems, which can best be described as engaging in an ongoing culture of blame towards Renault and anybody else when things are not going right for them (RBR).


June 17, 2015 10:32 PM

F1 » Lauda backs calls to make F1 ‘riskier’

107SS2009: Yossarian, The difference between stupidity and or c***s*****s and a genus------is that genus recognises it (the hypocrisy/negativity/doom and gloom in this case) has a limit.
It's hard to say whether you're being just nasty for the sake of it or you need stronger medication ?
A typical response with no answer to the subject. But not to worry about my medication, off to the workshop for some stronger once, over and out.


June 17, 2015 10:19 PM

F1 » Kaltenborn backs handing over rule-making powers

GR8racer: In recent years changes have often been made it seems for the sake of change i.e. V10s to V8s. That was pointless to me, the V10s had become very reliable so if they wanted to slow the cars down why not detune them instead.
They did apply their brakes on the than ongoing horsepower race by imposing a rev limit, which by the way, in those days the primary horsepower development objective was being obtained by increasing engine revs with the challenge being keeping the engine in one piece. compare that with todays objective of trying to extract the maximum horsepower at as well bellow the maximum RPM allowed as possible. that was one of the reasons the FIA imposed the maximum fuel flow at 10.5k RPM.

Page 19 of 1275
« 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  »

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2015 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.