Crash.Net User: DennisKwok

Comments rating: 426
Position in rating: 360

Show Comments on:

DennisKwok

March 29, 2015 10:25 AM

MotoGP » Espargaro: We are really f**ked in that aspect!


bringBACKthe990s: I was under the impression that satellite teams at least started the season on equal footing. And simply didnt get updates as fast as the factory boys.
The satellite bikes at the start of the season are generally what the factory teams were using at the end of the previous season. The only manufacturer who goes against this is Honda, who lease works bikes to satellite teams, but give updates a few races behind the Repsol bikes.

DennisKwok

March 05, 2015 8:43 PM

F1 » Manor pass FIA crash tests with updated 2014 car


Rumour has it, that the Albert Park circuit will have an extra chicane this year. Well done to Manor for getting back on the grid though. But, you have to wonder what the medium to long-term plans are for the team? Even if their 2015 car makes it to the grid by the euro season, they still not going to end up any higher than dead last in the constructors championship.

DennisKwok

March 02, 2015 6:37 PM
Last Edited 152 days ago

F1 » McLaren ends testing with 32 laps-a-day average


Moi: I don't understand why teams (at least big ones like McLaren) don't have full car dyno's (not just engine) to perform extensive testing of the complete systems weeks or months before hitting the track.
Before leaving, this is exactly what Ross Brawn implemented at Mercedes, hence why they were able to hit the ground running last season. Honda and Mclaren keep saying that they're only experiencing the same issues that teams had last year, but that is no excuse whatsoever. Honda have had a year of hindsight and should have followed Mercs lead and Mclaren have had a year of running the Mercedes. Their reliability has been appalling and simply not good enough, whatever way you dress it up.

DennisKwok

February 17, 2015 12:02 PM
Last Edited 165 days ago

F1 » The future of F1: HAVE YOUR SAY


The problem with F1 isn't the product, but how the product is marketed and promoted to the younger generation. I'm a science school teacher and the number of young people actually interested in F1 is depressingly low and generally confined to the 'geeks'. When you consider the technology, speed, money and glamour that goes into F1, it's crazy to see just large the percentage of young people is that haven't got the foggiest clue about F1. It's utterly disgraceful the distain that F1 has for social media and alternative ways of engaging the younger generation and making is accessible to them. Instead, they continue to give an elitist stance, relying on an ever ageing hardcore population of fans, who are willing to pay out extortionate prices for tickets and/or pay TV channels. The power-brokers of F1 do not seem to be interested in investing in the future of the sport. Instead, they seem to be content to sit in their ivory towers, ignorant to the fact of an every decreasing audience....

DennisKwok

January 28, 2015 10:18 PM
Last Edited 185 days ago

F1 » Renault seeking ‘at least five wins’ in F1 2015


Hi richard, what official FIA outputs are you quoting from to get a figure of 880bhp? Please post them, so I can see for myself. I can only assume that you quoting power figures from 2001. Yes, none of the V8s broke the 800bhp barrier. You only need to use common sense to work that out. Somers and Scarbs have not said anywhere catagorically that Mercs advantage is electrical. If they have, please point me in the right direction. It is widely known that Mercs powertrain advantage is largely mechanical, as they're the only ones using a split-turbo arrangement, which allows them to use a bigger compressor without incurring excessive intake charge temps and also reducing pressure loss.


Page 3 of 13
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  »

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.