93 responses to “Daily #F1 News and Comment: Friday 14th Feburary 2014”

1. I like the second livery the most…

   • me too. the blue accents on the air scoop intake box thing on top is nice 😉

     • That’s why i chose it too 😉

2. i love reading the reports of possible new sponsorships as much as the next guy, but i wonder if F1 sometimes might appear a bit shambolic or Mickey Mouse to outsiders or the public-at-large?!

   lol…

3. Villeneuve also said the recent Jerez test showed that the new technology is too complex, while the cars are too slow. ”The lap times (at Jerez) were barely faster than what we did in 1997 in Jerez … that’s 17 years ago. I’m not sure why it has become so important to keep going slower,” he said.

   JV comes in for a lot of stick, but superficially at least, comments like these must resonate w/ more sophisticated (and cynical?) fans?

   Mr. E himself has pointed out the farce that is any F1 “Green” initiative focused on the racing cars, as the carbon footprint of the teams is ginormous, and the ‘payoff’ from eco-friendly tech like the new engines is dubious/uncertain, at best.

   Idk if JV’s complaints withstand the scrutiny of the Market though, or not.

   Thoughts?

   • I agree to some extent, although Mr E’s solutions were focused primarily on the footprint of the teams, as are most detractors, and in the grand scheme of things making the F1 circus itself green is a pebble in the ocean. Where I do think F1 can bring things to the table is in the development of technology and, perhaps more importantly, the perception of technology, and this is where its ‘green’ focus should, and is to some extent, be. I would much rather the teams individuals ‘footprints’ are ignored, and those restrictions limiting the development of this technology are lifted. I like the idea behind the new PU, but lets allow them to use as much fuel as possible, but don’t restrict energy harvesting and use… then we’ll see what they can do to make the fastest/most efficient hybrids.

     • F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of engineering. Over the last couple of years we’ve seen aerodynamics rule the roost and in terms of innovation and driving (no pun intended) the automotive industry forward it was not really the “pinnacle” any more was it?

       These news rules, love them or loath them are forcing engineers to think again. I am with you re the energy harvesting Adam. But I would still say limit the fuel and let them harvest as much energy as they want.

       What that will do is get teams to run less fuel because they are developing super efficient ERS systems and hence can run lighter and win 🙂

     • Except that F1 is everything but green. The carbon footprint of the ERS batteries alone makes the internal combustion engine look eco-friendly. Production of current hybrid systems has a devastating ecological profile.

       • Very true but if F1 use them more the profile of how they get made gets raised and then engineers will have to figure out how to do it better.

         By not pushing forward (or being pushed) we’ll become extinct like the dinosaurs 🙂

         • The F1 engineers can’t really change how they are made. The making of a battery involves several chemical processes with very toxic materials or byproducts. Unless we go the full mile and run electric cars with hydrogen fuel cells, electric and hybrid cars are devastating to the environment. Not by emissions, but by the production process.

         • Hydrogen cars? That go down as a bomb! (what is it with me and puns today! 😛 )

         • Did you by any chance eat a clown for breakfast 😉

         • Really struggling with the feet, feels like I have a foot in my mouth! :p

         • But thats the point, to understand what can be done you need to push boundaries and innovate, as DQ says, to try to find the limits and extents of what can be done.

           To make batteries you have to use several chemical processes, that is how you make a battery everyone knows that, but as my friend who works in engineering at Newcastle University is always telling me, it was also ‘known’ that it was not possible to make certain colours of LED’s, and now look at LED technology.

       • Danielo, JV, and Mr. E,

         F1 is not trying to be more green, or eco-friendly.

         F1 has added fuel efficiency as a challenge.

         It’s been welcomed by the automobile manafacturers because it’s relevant to the real world and enables them to justify their particpation in F1.

         It’s been welcomed by those of us who live in 2014 and are not afraid of technology.

         If you’re looking for an eco-friendly sport to follow, I’m sure you can find one, but won’t be F1.

         Full credits to you three for mediocre strawman arguments, in any case…

         • I’m not afraid of technology, but F1 is supposed to be poinnacle of motorsport. It should be about guys racing each other flat out. F1 should guzzle all the world’s oil and laugh about it while clubbing baby seals. That’d be more honest than pretending to be green when you’re not.
           I don’t want ‘Greenpeace memorial’ fuel saving runs. That’s not racing. That’s just utterly boring.

         • You have something of a point DS/FH, BUT………….F1 has very rarely been about racing flat out. About the only time it has been in the last, what, 30 years was during the re-fuelling days.

           At just about al other times, drivers have had to do some level of nursing their equipment to look after engines/tyres/fuel/gearboxes etc.

           I’m not sure it was boring back then, either…

         • Full credits to you three for mediocre strawman arguments, in any case…

           Aww, c’mon. ¡No seas malo!

           Strawmen are fun to build, and easy to knock-down!! ✌

       • I disagree. The production of the batteries may damage the environment, but the impact is either spread around the world or localized in areas where no one lives. On the other hand, the emissions from internal combustion engines in small densely populated areas like Los Angeles has real effects on human health right now. If by switching to full electric or hybrid cars, the pollution to places with significantly lower population density, the benefits to human health can be huge.

         And the point of switching to new engines is not to lower the environmental impact of F1. It’s to push the boundaries of the technology. The hybrid tech is not perfect. That’s fine. That’s why we need Formula 1 and Formula E adopt it or related technologies in order to improve them.

     • Hi Adam, I’ll go you one better, give the teams a fuel budget (and tires etc) and let them use it over the whole season, instead of on a race by race basis. That should see some innovating 😉

       • All good stuff Matt! You hit the nail on the head, the specifics can be refined and argued over, but the point is getting them to innovate as much as possible, I feel restrictions on harvesting, use, and fuel as they are won’t encourage that enough.

   • Joe its just sometimes (most) he says stupid things so you are not expecting him to come up with gems.

     • haha yes, so true. I wish I could remember what JV said to David Coulthard when DC grabbed him after a GP in either 2012 or 2013 where Villeneuve was doing commentary. Does anyone remember this?

       I can’t remember if it happened in 2012 or 2013, but I think it was 2012 on the BBC, pre-Suzi Perry (ie, “The Good Ol’ Days), maybe in the post-race or forum show, and the three BBC’ers were walking along when they came up on JV and DC grabbed him for an impromptu interview, and I think JV said some really incendiary or otherwise unfiltered/unscripted stuff and it was classic lol.

       I’ve been searching online for like 15min for it and can’t find it, so I give up – but someone help me out if they remember this!!

       Cheers DQ!

   • Everything free, except amount of joules used. Diesel? Solid fuel? Nuclear or solar power? All ok. Just stay within the 107%.
     Not sure about reintroducing refuelling but that might attrack innovation as well (change batteries).
     However on the aero Side I probably would add restrictions, to make sure it’s all about engines again.

   • Well, in my casual reading it seems that (quelle surprise) turbos are not returning expected real world mileage, put down to people stomping the go fast pedal in order to access boost for acceleration. Using the ERS to keep the turbo spooled as F1 is doing to obviate lag would have both an immediate and large impact for real world mileage should it make its way to road cars. Yes, in many ways the “greening” is a big fat publicity ploy, but the doesn’t mean that useful tech might not come from it nonetheless. 🙂

   • “JV comes in for a lot of stick, but superficially at least, comments like these must resonate w/ more sophisticated (and cynical?) fans?”

     I’m not very sophisticated but candidly I’m cynical about JV. I’m a North American, and so I’ve followed various North American F1 racers (including from Mexico of course). I noticed JV in his Formula Atlantic years, and have followed his career since then.

     He was a talented guy behind the wheel, (particularly before his concussions), but his logic became more obtuse over time. In recent years his thinking resembles the songs from his renowned music career, which is to say both fuzzy and dull.

     JV has consistantly held on to four delusions about modern F1 which is that F1 should:
     1) Always spend unlimited amounts of money
     2) Corner faster
     3) Build continually more powerful engines
     4) Become more dangerous

     At the end of his interview in the Telegraph he dismisses the modern F1 fan by surmising, “you cannot keep their interest for more than five minutes.”

     Given that thinking, “JV World” is a very appropriate term…

     • I’m cynical about JV.

       As I said, “Idk if JV’s complaints withstand the scrutiny of the Market though, or not.”

       I think he’s often deliberately provocative, whether to promote himself, or simply for his own entertainment. I’ll have to go back and re-read the Telegraph piece, but I thought his disparaging remark concerning the attention span of ‘fans’ was directed towards the “wrong” kind of fans (the ones he implied F1 shouldn’t be pursuing).

       Yeah, I’ll have to go back and re-read the interview, but appreciate your sharing your perspective regardless.

       Cheers!

4. Red Bull-Peugeot ? Or they have a super secret plan B, or I really doubt they could switch engine in 2015. Ferrari and Mercedes will never supply a direct competitor for the title

   • I wouldn’t put it past them to buid an own engine. They could also try to lure in a engine manufacturer from a market they’re interested in – Red Bull-Lada 😉 I’m sure there would be engine manufacturers willing to take a punt if RB is providing the funding for the project. Or, as I said they could hire someone like Osamu Goto or Mario Ilien and start an own project. That wouldn’t come to life until 2015 though.
     Cosworth seems to have a V6 turbo prototype, but no funding and customers. A whole year of RB funding and secret testing could be a mucho viable Plan B.

     • Did PURE also have some prototyping or only dreams/plans?

       • PURE was just a pipe dream, but Cosworth has a real engine, so if they were to start testing/developing now with RB funding, the thing could be ready by 2015.

         • I wonder how much longer Red Bull Racing will be around as a team?

           I don’t have any direct insight into this, but I do recall reading a piece by Rencken last year in which he suggested that Red Bull’s commitment to Formula 1 in the future may be more likely as a series sponsor than a team owner/operator, given how much dominance they’ve exerted and the media saturation that’s resulted.

           idk tho…

     • I believe the ‘Fat Hippo’ already mentioned Red Bull/Cosworth as an almost viable solution. Could be interesting, it will also show anyone who still has doubts, that when RedBull are not winning regularly they will pull the plug on the project. If they won’t stick by the engine partner who powered them to 4 conservative titles and who also developed team specific engine maps so the whole blown floor thing would work correctly, then why would they stick in F1 if they are seen to be loosing that winning edge and that in turn has an effect on brand image.

       • That’s quite a strange reasoning. F1 is a business. RB have no obligation to keep ordering their engines from Renault. If Renault don’t get it right, why shouldn’t they be allowed to change the supplier? McLaren too switched away from a supplier that gave them championship titles and nobody bats an eye. It’s pretty obvious that the Renault engine is a pub, why should they be required to keep them?

         • I know business is business, McLaren have not had a title in any form since 2008 but Renault really went the extra step for RB over the last 4 seasons and the moment they have an issue there is talk of dumping them. I just feel a bit for Renault, yes they had the same time as the rest and yes they chose the resources to throw at it, but considering that RB are a “works team” why is there more team specific problems with them than the others? Have Renault been tested to the limit of the relationship by Newey and co refusing to fully acknowledge the need for cooling and sensible packaging. I just think that talk of changing an engine supply after 1 pre-season test is laughable a best. There is no way Ferrari or Merc will give them a supply, I doubt Honda will do it in their 1st year back so they would have to find an independent supply which is no mean feat. From prototype to race engine in 12months is pushing it a lot, especially is you only have 1 team to supply, you know you won’t recoup costs ever, so unless RedBull open the wallet with no questions this who thing is a non-starter, even with all the money you need to get an engine in a car on the grid at Melbourne for 2015 is really going to take some monumental efforts and epic levels of collaboration between team ans supplier.

           I really think this story is news, for news’ sake.

         • Or maybe Red Bull has leaked it on purpose to turn the heat onto Renault?

         • Mind you though that all the talk about dumping Renault has been done by Minardi, not RB.
           And we are not privy to what’s happening behind closed doors. The relationship might have turned sour way earlier than we think. And Renault ‘going the extra step’ is a bit exaggerated. They didn’t do that because of charity towards RB. They wanted to have their name on the winning car, so they had every reason to indulge RB and in the end it was Vettel’s ability to adapt his driving style accordingly that made it work, else the 4-cylinder mode would have ended up a useless gimmick. It certainly didn’t work for Webber.

     • Red Bull – Lada would be the tops! Starts in -40°C without problems, has a powerful heater, runs on 86 octane fuel and the aerosuite is designed by a cubist. Another great feature is that any village smith can fix it with jesus-tape, a coat hanger and some bubble gum.

       • LOL

   • Honda ???

     • Doubt that. McLaren is the Honda works team. RB would only change if they get works team status.

       • I can’t see them dropping Renault as quickly as 2015, unless they have a viable engine partner lined up. Cosworth with the right funding could probably produce a nifty engine. Depends on what Red Bull want to do really.

     • Thats what I thought as well but don’t think McLaren will like that, especially if they have a ‘works’ deal with Honda.

       Interesting point Luca raises though. We are trying to get more manufacturers into F1 but what happens if the ‘works’ team get beaten by a customer team? As Luca says, will they want to supply a team that can and does beat them?

       • Mercedes did. They were beaten by McLaren in 2010-2012.

         • But Mclaren was Mercedes powered well before Mercedes enetered in F1 as a team, there are contracts that needs to be complied.

           Fat Hippo said an interesting thing, they could buy an engine from Reanult, and then developing it all by themselves and calling it Infinity engine…they have the resources to do it, and this could help them in the process of developing the car.

     • Red Bull Toyota.

       • Toyota announced that they are entering WRC not F1.

         They’re already using their Cologne centre to produce prototypes.

   • Personally, I think a return to a Ford-Cosworth partnership could be kind of exciting. Ford have extensive turbo experience from WRC, and if Renault truly fail this season it might be a good time to pick up new customers for a new engine supplier. /baseless speculation

     • Ford have extensive experience in LOSING in WRC.

       They haven’t won a drivers championship since 1981 – and that was a normally aspirated car.

   • There are two different TJ13 threads to tie-in together here…

     First is that Gian Carlo Minardi stated publicly on his blog yesterday, http://www.minardi.it/tra-conferme-e-supposizioni-si-va-verso-il-bahrain/
     that he is hearing there is a serious long lead-time problem for our friends at Renault Sport F1. This is perhaps the first public confirmation what TJ13 reported track-side from Jerez. I’m not a materials guy, but other folks have noted that crankshaft problems, and long lead-times for resolutions point to a problem with their hard forging tooling.

     Neither Rob White two weeks ago, nor Remi Taffin mention the problem directly, which is interesting. Yet Minardi hears that RB are evaluating alternative engine suppliers for 2015. Given that Newey attempted to leave McLaren not once, but twice to work with Renault instead of Mercedes (he was successful the 2nd time), and that they’ve won 4 WCC’s in a row (would’ve been 5 if not for Brawn’s clever double diffuser in ’09), indicates that they see a problem so serious that they need to look elsewhere for a power-unit.

     The 2nd TJ13 thread to tie-in here is that the good Judge has written a few articles that speculate as to the underlying purpose of the FIA suddenly opening up bids for a spot on the F1 grid.

     The immediate thinking was there is a significant organization who wants a spot on the grid. I wonder if we should perhaps instead be looking at a new engine manufacturer (or two) who want to join F1? Supplying a new team may be easier than poaching existing teams away from other PU suppliers…

     In which case it may merely be a coincidence that Renault are having various teething issues, and Red Bull are (rumored by Minardi to be) evaluating an alternative PU supplier for 2015. RB may have been approached by a new supplier prior to Jerez perhaps.

     • Interesting take on things. I like the logic applied.

     • Not so sure about forging problems – I think the cranks are machined from billet. Although the billet may be forged for grain alignment, I wouldn’t see that as an extremely long lead time (with enough money).

       • I appreciate those thoughts.

         I’m inclined to speculate about the specifics of this crankshaft problem.

         Minardi’s article saying that Renault Sport F1 must be significantly desperate to shop outside their own walls for a solution indicates the performance penalty is significant, just as the Judge learned at Jerez.

         Since it appears that neither Renault, nor their teams, are likely to share any information about this problem, speculating as to the specifics of this problem is worthwhile.

         • I heard Mercedes had a problem getting all the components to work together, this was in December. From what I heard the challenge is not just getting the components to work together, but also the vibrations of a V6 is much harsher than that of a V8 so the turbo kept on breaking (hence the cover they built).

           Ferrari has invested heavily in their electronics and are actively trying to recruit the ERS boffins from the likes of Mercedes. Ferrari does not have this protective cover and one can only assume they have it nailed down to a micron.

           What I’m getting at is Renault is so far behind it is unreal. I recall TJ mentioning on the eve of the test that Renault has a severe crank problem which they played down as a “bad batch”. Today Taffin said they have to prioritise so what does that mean? Reliability before performance? A super heavy durable engine that weights a ton?

           5 days to Bahrain and 4 weeks till the fun starts 😛

       • No, maybe not a long lead time but with machining likely fully committed can’t see any surprise with looking beyond their own house to have critical work carried out.

         • I did write from Jerez 20 weeks for a fix…. TJ13 doubters be banished… Not you of course PS…

           But when there are design problems for components that have machine production lead times of weeks, it’s clearly a huge problem.

           With existing engines this doesn’t happen as you can always revert to the previous iteration of component as a ‘get you through’ kind of measure.

           Anyway, the snow is awesome and the Italian girls look like beautiful Ferraris….

           Mrs J has been banished off to lessons 😉

         • I understand the honour’s sentiments about the Italian ladies, and will confess that my wife’s ancestry is half Italian, and she is lovely.

           I’ve been doing some background research on this story of Renault’s crankshafts, and quickly waded in over my head, candidly. One of the articles I found illustrates the various parameters that would go in to crankshaft design, touches upon the exotic materials and methods that the F1 engine manufacturers might have employed, and most importantly gives us some ideas as to why there can be a 20 week lead time to rectify a crankshaft problem.
           http://www.epi-eng.com/piston_engine_technology/crankshaft_design_issues.htm

           I’ve been curious about the implications of this problem for the Renault teams between now and mid-June. To mitigate against this problem, will we see for example lower revs, or boost turned down, (etc.)? I’m guessing the soonest we see those details will be Bahrain 2, or Australia, but that is wild speculation.

           Who here speaks Italian well enough to interpret Gian Carlo Minardi’s article of Feb. 13th?
           http://www.minardi.it/tra-conferme-e-supposizioni-si-va-verso-il-bahrain/

           I’m particularly interested in translations of Gian Carlo’s second paragraph…

         • Thank you VM that crankshaft piece was interesting reading.
           And with a rough translate on Minardi’s piece, that second para does warrant further and accurate translation.

   • Why not? >:->

5. “Sochi will be ready to race but when?”
   Is this a bit of a scare story…? – The facility is 91% complete, with 8-9 months to go… And building works are bound to be slow at this time of year in Russia…

   • The building works are currently on hiatus due to the Olympics, but I’ve seen Russian building works when I lived there. The thing WILL be ready. The other infrastructure, like … ahem… toilets … might be a different matter, but the track will definitely be ready or a lot of people will be relocated to the Sakha republic.

     • Toilets, specially in public areas like high schools or malls, have always been an embarrassing subject in Russia. This dates back to Soviet times. For some reason, no one ever cared to maintain those facilities and among most Russians it’s always understood that you’re always better off by visiting a restroom in a private home before going on a long trip.. Most Russians are fascinated with the cleanness of public toilets in the west. I have heard so many times from Russians who just came back from their first trip to the west: “Can you believe it, I visited a restroom in the airport, and it was nice and clean and there was music playing..”

6. In terms of the Renault issues I’m not shocked that they’re seeking refuge from outside resources in time of need. We’re less than a month away from the season opener and if it means getting their 4 customers on the grid or not then they have to save face. On the other hand I have little to no doubt that GMM/Minardi are inflating the ‘crisis’ as a way of heaping pressure on Renault. Lest we forget a manufacturer that were by far and away the most successful in the V8 era.

   I think some of the issues faced by Renault have been circumnavigated by both Mercedes and Ferrari as they have a works team in order to work on installation issues with. Ferrari have already boldly claimed that the fact they are both a constructor and (ICE) manufacturer has aided them in their design processes.
   I’d assume as defacto works team, Red Bull have worked alongside Renault on such intricasies too but perhaps the Red Bull ethos of pushing the boundaries has crept too far into the minds at Viry and now they’re paying the price.

   Although some of the issues faced by Renault are intrinsic to the PU and moreover the ERS this won’t be helped by the way Red Bull run the packaging margins and so perhaps all parties will have to crank back a little… With Lotus running fairly trouble free in Jerez on their promo day there is a glimmer of hope that things are on the up..

   Ferrari have also been seeing issues with the cabling heating beyond the optimum threshold due to the excessive charge rates when compared to the outgoing KERS systems. On top of this we have to consider that the controllers job has now been increased exponentially with AC coming from the MGU-K and H and needing to be converted to DC to be stored by the ES, or the controller acts as the middleman transporting AC from K to H or vice versa. This makes cooling the ES/Controller and cabling a top priority IMO as degradation could be a big factor. This of course is a massive problem for the teams as they want to reduce the packaging element as much as possible… Ferrari have worked with MEZZO technologies on new cooling rads and so this is where they could have the upper hand… (Especially as it’s clearly visible that the Ferrari powered cars have much smaller cooling apertures)

   Exciting times…. (Technically 😉 )

   • Hi Matt

     I listened to Sam Collins (Racecar Engineering) on Midweek Motor sport last Wednesday and he alluded to the fact that Renault have got their heat numbers grossly wrong, particularly on the ERS side, evidenced by the wild sidepod and body shape differences on all the Renault runners. Caterham obviously going for the least aero, most likely to finish a race layout.

     Kudo’s to TJ13 as he also admitted that this problem could never be resolved without some negotiation being done on the Feb homologation as it’s touch and go that they’ll resolve the issue by Bahrain.

     • Homologlation isn’t really an issue as per the outgoing V8 debacle(s) Renault will simply play their ‘reliability’ card and fix their errors… I haven’t heard Sam on the podcast, I’ll give it a lesson always happy to hear his insight too 🙂

       • *listen (damn auto correct)

         • Saw that but did not want to give you a lesson in English 😛

         • Shouldn’t that be *listen* in English DQ? 😀 Please forgive, I was up half the night trying to fix my mobile.

         • Matt’s comment? Yes.. But … This is getting confusing. Am commenting on my mobile so no idea what this relates to. Matt had a typo in his original post which he then corrected (auto correct got the blame) and then I just made a tongue in cheek comment,just because it is Friday 🙂

   • Thanks, Matt. Always a pleasure to read your posts. Exciting times, indeed!

   • Renault could ask for reliability break ( AutoSport )

     Renault has not ruled out applying to the FIA for permission to make modifications to its engine for reliability reasons once the 2014 Formula 1 season gets underway.

     On February 28, each manufacturer must have homologated a single-specification of its engine, which will be locked for the season, although Appendix 4 of the F1 sporting regulations does leave the door open for modifications after that date should they be for “reliability, safety or cost saving reasons”.

     Although Renault is confident it has made major strides with its engine since the Jerez test, head of track operations Remi Taffin accepts that it is possible it could need to make such an application.

     Given the extent of the engine change this year, it is possible all three engine manufacturers will have to make such requests.

     “If we have any reliability issues it’s more difficult after you have applied for an engine for the year to make some changes,” said Taffin.

     “But there is still a ‘fair and equitable’ rule that exists that allows us to change any parts if we have any reliability problems, which we did in the past and I think we will still do it.

     “Having said that, we are not saying we have massive issues on reliability because we have done some good tests on the dynos and we know that each part is working fine, we have to make it work together.”

     Despite Renault’s difficulties to date, Taffin has no doubts that the marque’s 1.6-litre turbocharged V6 engine will prove competitive as the problems have prevented it showing its true potential.

     He is adamant the hardware problems, particularly relating to the energy store, have been solved meaning that the key is getting components that work well individually to work together.

     “Where we are struggling is where we put everything into the car and have to get the most out of it.””Because we are struggling to make everything work together, we have not actually got the performance we have from each [individual] component in terms of level of competitiveness.

     Taffin also downplayed the extent of Renault’s problems, suggesting they look worse to the outside world than they really are.

     “The situation is definitely worse from the outside than from the inside,” said Taffin.

     “It’s a difficult moment we will get through. We always said that it was so complex that if we have one or two problems that we have got to fix it is going to prevent you doing calibration or software development or so on.

     “We have been facing problems which are not hundreds of problems, it’s a few that we need to solve and as soon as we have done that, and I think we are 90 per cent into it.”

   • Exciting times…. (Technically)

     Matt, I just want to say how much I enjoy your comments and I’m so glad you continue posting here in the Judge’s chambers/court, even as you operate your own blog, b/c I don’t always remember to check everywhere else – so it’s great to find your insights here! They’re like little golden nuggets in a comments section that’s already strewn with great posts!

     Please keep it up! 🙂

7. Jacques Villeneuve: “Fakely…” ???

   • Clever pun, I thought (and hope it was intended not a miss-hear).

     “Fakely more exciting” is my new F1 catch-phrase 🙂

8. Lewis: “Hey Nico, is your hair always going to look so stupid”?
   Nico: “I PROMISE that that comment will come back to haunt you, dude…. “!!

   • Lewis: Hey Britney, when I grow up I want to date a pop star and be gangsta.
     Nico: No way you would ever find someone prettier than me…
     Lewis: Are you saying that ’cause I is black?

     • Wait… wtf?

       This one was kind of funny till that last line, “…I is black?”

       Being a hater isn’t funny… It’s just sad, and inappropriate.

       • Take a chill pill Vortex Motio. This was a dig at Lewis saying that himself when he kind of left the reservation at various times in 2012. The particular occasion was after he felt he had been unfairly fined by the FIA for some issue.

         • What Lewis said in 2011 at Monaco was “Maybe it’s because I’m black. That’s what Ali G says.” Afterwards he apologised for “a bit of a joke, which wasn’t funny at the time”.

           It’s still not funny.

           Nor is it funny that you’ve changed it to “I is black” instead.

     • Lewis: Are you saying that ’cause I is black?

       Whoa dude – wtf?

       Don’t think we do even subtle prejudice or bigotry here…

       • Joe, Vortex – I think you’re both seeing racism, where there is none. The line is a Ali G line and if you remember 2011, Lewis used a slightly different line himself, but hinted at this Ali G quote and embarrassed himself with this and his subsequent appology.
         I think it is fair game to poke fun at that moment and in no way is that racist. Aren’t I the one, who is usually accused to having a too thin skin? 😉

         • FH (& nambo) – I’m glad you took a moment to share those thoughts, and I apologize that I didn’t notice FH’s comments till a few hours ago.

           Let me concede that it is possible that you and nambo are correct, that perhaps Joe and I are over-reacting. But I think you’re wrong for two different reasons.

           First, I don’t think it is a coincidence that the folks who called this out the racism of that post are two Amercians who care about the high quality new journalism that the Judge is doing here. While I shouldn’t speak for Joe, I think it’s fairly safe to say that both of us would like to see the TJ site continue to grow, and gain readership through out the world.

           Personally, I’ve long wanted to see the beautiful sport of Formula 1 become more popular in the U.S. I’ll suggest that both Joe and I are seeing that statement from American eyes that are more sensitive to racism. I’m suggesting that we’re both calling it out as such because we know that other (potential) readers of this site may also see it as racism and not want to continue reading this site because it appears that racism is OK here.

           Again, whether it’s racism or not, is one question, but both Joe and I quickly recognized it as racism, and we won’t be the only ones.

           Second, to your point of bringing up the Ali G context. I find it ironic that you and others justify that humor as contextual to some of Sasha Baren Cohen’s oevre. Much of Cohen’s career has been focused on parodies of the subtle racism, discrimination and hatreds that prevade our societies.

           So when one justifies a racist statement in the context of Ali G humor, it appears that the Cohen’s joke was on you yet you don’t even realize it.

           Hope that helps.
           Best regards,
           VM

         • Thank you Mr Hippo. You hit the nail exactly on the head. I deliberately used Ali G’s exact wording to play on the gangsta theme and Hamilton’s own allusion to it in 2011.

       • I think you pulled it off with great aplomb JP.

         Then again it’s more satirical…

9. I don’t know the source for the item on Jack, but I saw a different tidbit of info in another article. Where Villeneuve added that Kimi as a smoker should have it easier this season and they had a nice picture: http://25.media.tumblr.com/b908113f9873b886f718a8babd349440/tumblr_mv0xjgMF2F1sor0p3o1_1280.jpg

   • I saw that. Do you think it is relevant though? Why would Kimi find it easier? What about Chilton or Gutierrez?

     Neither one of them look like the can harm a match stick…

10. Re Caption Comp

    Lewis- I can’t believe I ran out of fuel man!
    Nico- it’s a thinking man’s game these days mate.

    Or
    Lewis- if you could shagg any celebrity who would it be?
    Nico- it would have to be that Nicole from Pussycat Dolls.
    Lewis- Yeh, she is fit……when I’m an F1 driver she”ll be begging me to father her kids.

11. Lewis: “Nico man, I was only kidding”
    Nico: “whatever, I’m soooo not your boyfriend anymore”

12. Hey nico, I kid you not, one day there will be a guy from Wigan called TJ13 who will rewrite the rules of F1 journalism…….. You’ll see….

13. Nico: Dude, I almost had you..
    Lewis: Almost had me? You never had me.. You never had your kart…..

    • Nico: Dude, I almost had you..

      Lewis: Almost had me? You never had me.. You never had your kart…..

      lol. well done. for some reason that was the funniest to me, imagining their voices saying those lines haha.

      cheers!

14. In the end, you can’t make the cars go faster forever. At some point you can get to the point where the car is moving so fast that drivers get dizzy. IndyCar has run into this problem on Texas Speedway in the 90s. So, there is really a limit how fast the cars can go before the drivers start passing out. Another issue is the chassis technology. The chassis are getting better and better, and are more than capable of increasing lap times without any increases in engine power. This is why the 700hp cars kept up with the 1000hp turbo cars from the 80s, and I wouldn’t be surprised if 500hp cars could match the same speeds some day. The engines in GT racing are facing the same problem. A lot of GT cars in Le Mans GT class now have less horse power than their production counterparts. Finally, you have to take into account the reliability and cost considerations of the new engines. The 1000hp engines of the 80s probably had to be replaced after every race. These days one engine has to last for many races.

    • The engines in GT racing are facing the same problem. A lot of GT cars in Le Mans GT class now have less horse power than their production counterparts.

      That’s interesting. I haven’t followed LeMans GT racing that closely…I guess an example might be…idk, a Porsche 991 GT3 RSR or somthin’? lmk, m’k?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.