planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Oct 30, 2014 2:23 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 11:47 pm
Posts: 917
specdecible wrote:
Jinx wrote:
oh my dear lord... so when Vettel's alternator failed a couple of times, he was given better parts?

Just to be clear the alternator is part of the engine which is supplied by Renault not Red Bull.


The alternators are supplied to Renault by Magneti Marelli who are owned by FIAT who have a team in F1.

_________________
Champions are made from something they have deep inside of them - a desire, a dream, a vision. They have last-minute stamina, they have to be a little faster, they have the skill & the will but the will must be stronger than the skill. Muhammad Ali


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 7:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
If Ferrari has MM supplying substandard alternator bearings, why hasnt McLaren figured out they can give RBR bad ECU's too? :lol:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:44 pm
Posts: 430
F1yer wrote:
Herbalist wrote:
F1yer wrote:
Till now , it was all speculation that Massa wasnt getting the same parts. Now its an admitted fact !


No, they've said that many times during the year. And i'm still interested in how Ferrari was wrong in favouring Alonso.

Well - I never saw any direct quote saying Alonso is favored with respect to parts etc.

Hell , the first I saw even a headline with parts not being the same was when Massa started beating Alonso. Then they came out saying "oh Massa was running different wing and such like " :nod:

And proving that ferrari are wrong to take the approach of favoring one driver from race 1 wasnt my intention - its just how Ferrari want to play in the sport - so good for them. But if you insist - if they had supported Massa from the beginning , probbaly Massa would have challenged for the title , probably got the WCC with both drivers firing OR been able to steal points off Vettel to secure Alonso the title. Its all woulda coulda shoulda

The only negative I can see in giving Massa equal treatment is the risk that Alonso's toys might end up on track and Ferrari would lose more points than they would gain by properly supporting 2 drivers.


I could try to convince you're wrong in your view of Ferrari. I very much doubt you'll believe it as you have already made up your mind about Ferrari and how they operate.

In short Alonso got the newer equipment at a few of the fly-aways towards the end of the season. Abu Dhabi is one, and it's mentioned in press releases from Felipe. For the beginning and middle of the season there's nothing to suggest Alonso got better equipment than Massa. It's just that Massa really sucked at the beginning and there's also nothing to suggest that Massa's needed support from his team or anything else to peform better. When most teams would have actually fired the guy for his performances, you talk about him having lack of support??? You're also suggesting Felipe would have fought for the WDC if they had supported him?? How could they support him more when everyone called for his head? They even gave him a new chassis after just 2 races to be clear of any doubt. I cannot see how Ferrari could support Felipe more after such a year.

But carry on denying facts... so many others do it as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 6587
ashley313 wrote:
If Ferrari has MM supplying substandard alternator bearings, why hasnt McLaren figured out they can give RBR bad ECU's too? :lol:



Because the FIA know Ron's a cheatin' bar steward so all the ECUs go to the FIA and the FIA randomly hand them out. :P

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 5741
ob1kenobi.23 wrote:
specdecible wrote:
Jinx wrote:
oh my dear lord... so when Vettel's alternator failed a couple of times, he was given better parts?

Just to be clear the alternator is part of the engine which is supplied by Renault not Red Bull.


The alternators are supplied to Renault by Magneti Marelli who are owned by FIAT who have a team in F1.

I smell a juicy conspiracy!

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Rosberg - Bottas


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 1:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:29 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Wrexham, UK
Covalent wrote:
ob1kenobi.23 wrote:
specdecible wrote:
Jinx wrote:
oh my dear lord... so when Vettel's alternator failed a couple of times, he was given better parts?

Just to be clear the alternator is part of the engine which is supplied by Renault not Red Bull.


The alternators are supplied to Renault by Magneti Marelli who are owned by FIAT who have a team in F1.

I smell a juicy conspiracy!

Cue thread "Ferrari sabotaging Red Bull alternators, Twitmarsh should be sacked. Lulz".

_________________
"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
I almost forgot, didnt we recently have a conspiracy thread about Pirelli giving Ferrari preferential treatment?
Johnston wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
If Ferrari has MM supplying substandard alternator bearings, why hasnt McLaren figured out they can give RBR bad ECU's too? :lol:



Because the FIA know Ron's a cheatin' bar steward so all the ECUs go to the FIA and the FIA randomly hand them out. :P

stop being the fun police

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:35 am
Posts: 787
ashley313 wrote:
Johnston wrote:
The Alternator problem was a known one before the season started I believe but Renault didn't sort it and the Red Bull design exasperated the problem I think.

as for the KERS on Marks car Ashley has a very good theory on that. I'll let her explain it herself.

I almost forgot I had a theory! Thanks for the reminder. Also, Adrian said in Austin that Renault has been suffering the same type of alternator failure since testing in 2005.

Back to my theory. Drivers don't use KERS the same way. Not only can you choose where to deploy KERS energy and how much to use, you can also choose the rate at which the energy is harvested from your rear axle, which in turn affects engine braking. We all know the Pirellis aren't very good at doing two things at once - you want to brake AND turn in? No, sorry, choose one or the other.

I think Mark's KERS problems come from using harvesting settings that are outside the happy place for the components, and I think he uses those harvesting rates because it has the desired effect on braking that suits his style. He is always slow in, fast out, while his teammate is fast in, slow out. A greater harvesting rate and more "abrupt" input to the tires could also explain why Mark seems to use up his tires sooner in that first stint that in teammate, almost all the time. Further, whenever Mark loses KERS his performance seems MORE affected than anyone else who loses it. He gets MUCH slower, which to me indicates he's losing performance not just from the lack of the power boost, but also the help under braking.

He also never seems surprised or makes a big stink about the KERS failures, which makes me think they understand why its happening (if I can come up with this they certainly can) and have decided that the benefits of using it in that manner outweigh the potential failures.

I've also read a lot about the possibility that RBR uses a sort of two stage KERS system - where they store some energy in battery packs like the rest of the teams, and some in supercaps. The difference being that the supercaps can deliver the energy more quickly than the battery packs, but that the battery packs hold the energy for longer and can deliver it more smoothly. What I don't know is how that kind of setup would influence harvesting, but I imagine it could magnify the problem for Mark.


Ashley in 2011 when KERS came back from before the race even started Marks KERS and suspension and who knows what else was not working before he even got the grid while vettel's KERS worked fine.
It was brocken before Webber even started his brand new car.

2012 first race of the season in melbourne brand new KERS did not work in qualifying yet again where vettel's was fine and Webber outqualified him with no KERS.
Webbers KERS in 2012 was brocken from day 1 both years. brand new RB7 and brand new RB8 both had problems on first day in melbourne . Not from Webber overusing it or overheating it or whatever other theory Ashley will come up with.
Overheating theories of yours have merit when the problems happen on lap 40 on a very hot day when Webber was pushing to the maximum for the win. Not on the first day in a brand new car before you even start the car in the garage where its nice and air conditioned. LOL

Stop claiming Webber is somehow overusing his KERS causing it to overheat or fail when its brocken from day 1 . If this topic comes up in another 100 threads you will over and over again come up with new high tech essays and theories why Webber damaged his KERS or overheated it or drives differently. It's good you admit you are in love with Vettel in other threads but stop making up theories to prove outright lies and fiction when you know they are not true as the facts speak for themsleves.

2011 100% brand new RB7 in melbourne KERS did not work .
2012 another brand new car RB8 and co-incidence KERS did not work on the first day racing. While Vettels KERS worked fine.

_________________
"It was like I was in a tunnel. Not only the tunnel under the hotel but the whole circuit was a tunnel. I was just going and going, more and more and more and more. I was way over the limit but still able to find even more." Ayrton Senna


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 1:00 pm
Posts: 2343
Peter77 wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
Johnston wrote:
The Alternator problem was a known one before the season started I believe but Renault didn't sort it and the Red Bull design exasperated the problem I think.

as for the KERS on Marks car Ashley has a very good theory on that. I'll let her explain it herself.

I almost forgot I had a theory! Thanks for the reminder. Also, Adrian said in Austin that Renault has been suffering the same type of alternator failure since testing in 2005.

Back to my theory. Drivers don't use KERS the same way. Not only can you choose where to deploy KERS energy and how much to use, you can also choose the rate at which the energy is harvested from your rear axle, which in turn affects engine braking. We all know the Pirellis aren't very good at doing two things at once - you want to brake AND turn in? No, sorry, choose one or the other.

I think Mark's KERS problems come from using harvesting settings that are outside the happy place for the components, and I think he uses those harvesting rates because it has the desired effect on braking that suits his style. He is always slow in, fast out, while his teammate is fast in, slow out. A greater harvesting rate and more "abrupt" input to the tires could also explain why Mark seems to use up his tires sooner in that first stint that in teammate, almost all the time. Further, whenever Mark loses KERS his performance seems MORE affected than anyone else who loses it. He gets MUCH slower, which to me indicates he's losing performance not just from the lack of the power boost, but also the help under braking.

He also never seems surprised or makes a big stink about the KERS failures, which makes me think they understand why its happening (if I can come up with this they certainly can) and have decided that the benefits of using it in that manner outweigh the potential failures.

I've also read a lot about the possibility that RBR uses a sort of two stage KERS system - where they store some energy in battery packs like the rest of the teams, and some in supercaps. The difference being that the supercaps can deliver the energy more quickly than the battery packs, but that the battery packs hold the energy for longer and can deliver it more smoothly. What I don't know is how that kind of setup would influence harvesting, but I imagine it could magnify the problem for Mark.


Ashley in 2011 when KERS came back from before the race even started Marks KERS and suspension and who knows what else was not working before he even got the grid while vettel's KERS worked fine.
It was brocken before Webber even started his brand new car.

2012 first race of the season in melbourne brand new KERS did not work in qualifying yet again where vettel's was fine and Webber outqualified him with no KERS.
Webbers KERS in 2012 was brocken from day 1 both years. brand new RB7 and brand new RB8 both had problems on first day in melbourne . Not from Webber overusing it or overheating it or whatever other theory Ashley will come up with.
Overheating theories of yours have merit when the problems happen on lap 40 on a very hot day when Webber was pushing to the maximum for the win. Not on the first day in a brand new car before you even start the car in the garage where its nice and air conditioned. LOL

Stop claiming Webber is somehow overusing his KERS causing it to overheat or fail when its brocken from day 1 . If this topic comes up in another 100 threads you will over and over again come up with new high tech essays and theories why Webber damaged his KERS or overheated it or drives differently. It's good you admit you are in love with Vettel in other threads but stop making up theories to prove outright lies and fiction when you know they are not true as the facts speak for themsleves.

2011 100% brand new RB7 in melbourne KERS did not work .
2012 another brand new car RB8 and co-incidence KERS did not work on the first day racing. While Vettels KERS worked fine.

Yea, because none of those components ever turned a lap in winter testing, or free practices before qualifying. They most certainly replaced all of those components between FP3 Saturday morning and qualifying.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
In the beginning of 2011 they had teething woes with KERS in general - do you KNOW there were no issues with the other car? I don't think you do. You don't get every bit of relevant technical info over team radio or in driver quotes after a session, especially on something the team isn't proud of. Sometimes even in practice and qual you don't get the news - like Monaco this year when they lost an alternator in practice. Who reported that? Nobody I know of, until Renault mentioned it much later in the season.

Further, "brand new" or "at the start of a race" doesn't mean anything - those parts are typically used prior to that.

Can you tell me what part in a KERS system could possibly be "less good"? Its not like the difference between choosing normal and recycled concrete when building something.

Why would a team with the resources of RBR only have enough "good" components for one setup? They can clearly afford and have the time to pack multiple components of equal quality so there is no NEED to only have ONE set of good parts. So if they don't HAVE to have substandard parts on one car, WHY would they? Do you think they have purposely wasted the time to build two completely different setups in hopes that one will periodically fail and put their WCC title in jeopardy? On what planet does that make ANY sense?

If you have to ignore the facts of how something works to make your conspiracy theory work, its probably not a very good conspiracy theory. More tinfoil needed.


edit: I also never said anything about "overheat" or "overuse".

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:32 am
Posts: 1840
Peter77 wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
Johnston wrote:
The Alternator problem was a known one before the season started I believe but Renault didn't sort it and the Red Bull design exasperated the problem I think.

as for the KERS on Marks car Ashley has a very good theory on that. I'll let her explain it herself.

I almost forgot I had a theory! Thanks for the reminder. Also, Adrian said in Austin that Renault has been suffering the same type of alternator failure since testing in 2005.

Back to my theory. Drivers don't use KERS the same way. Not only can you choose where to deploy KERS energy and how much to use, you can also choose the rate at which the energy is harvested from your rear axle, which in turn affects engine braking. We all know the Pirellis aren't very good at doing two things at once - you want to brake AND turn in? No, sorry, choose one or the other.

I think Mark's KERS problems come from using harvesting settings that are outside the happy place for the components, and I think he uses those harvesting rates because it has the desired effect on braking that suits his style. He is always slow in, fast out, while his teammate is fast in, slow out. A greater harvesting rate and more "abrupt" input to the tires could also explain why Mark seems to use up his tires sooner in that first stint that in teammate, almost all the time. Further, whenever Mark loses KERS his performance seems MORE affected than anyone else who loses it. He gets MUCH slower, which to me indicates he's losing performance not just from the lack of the power boost, but also the help under braking.

He also never seems surprised or makes a big stink about the KERS failures, which makes me think they understand why its happening (if I can come up with this they certainly can) and have decided that the benefits of using it in that manner outweigh the potential failures.

I've also read a lot about the possibility that RBR uses a sort of two stage KERS system - where they store some energy in battery packs like the rest of the teams, and some in supercaps. The difference being that the supercaps can deliver the energy more quickly than the battery packs, but that the battery packs hold the energy for longer and can deliver it more smoothly. What I don't know is how that kind of setup would influence harvesting, but I imagine it could magnify the problem for Mark.


Ashley in 2011 when KERS came back from before the race even started Marks KERS and suspension and who knows what else was not working before he even got the grid while vettel's KERS worked fine.
It was brocken before Webber even started his brand new car.

2012 first race of the season in melbourne brand new KERS did not work in qualifying yet again where vettel's was fine and Webber outqualified him with no KERS.
Webbers KERS in 2012 was brocken from day 1 both years. brand new RB7 and brand new RB8 both had problems on first day in melbourne . Not from Webber overusing it or overheating it or whatever other theory Ashley will come up with.
Overheating theories of yours have merit when the problems happen on lap 40 on a very hot day when Webber was pushing to the maximum for the win. Not on the first day in a brand new car before you even start the car in the garage where its nice and air conditioned. LOL

Stop claiming Webber is somehow overusing his KERS causing it to overheat or fail when its brocken from day 1 . If this topic comes up in another 100 threads you will over and over again come up with new high tech essays and theories why Webber damaged his KERS or overheated it or drives differently. It's good you admit you are in love with Vettel in other threads but stop making up theories to prove outright lies and fiction when you know they are not true as the facts speak for themsleves.

2011 100% brand new RB7 in melbourne KERS did not work .
2012 another brand new car RB8 and co-incidence KERS did not work on the first day racing. While Vettels KERS worked fine.


You have the facts of the events that have taken place. You have no more factually established why they happened than ashley. You certainly haven't proven that anything ashley wrote is a lie, even if you may write that she has not proved that what she wrote is true.

As far as I have seen on this forum, the generally accepted threshold for evidence for "Webber is being hampered" is much lower than the threshold for "Webber is not being hampered." Until I see a detailed article with proper evidence written by somebody who has more technical experience in F1, especially Red Bull Racing, than watching it from an armchair, I'm inclined to call bluff on any accusations of lies on this subject.

Theories are fine because they don't purport to be factual, iron clad statements on a subject, they extrapolate facts as evidence and they leave the judgement to the reader. You wrote "outright lies" but didn't explain why that was such.

_________________
The underlying thing about all this,no matter how bright you are,no matter how logical one is or how much money one has,you have to be a completely stupid optimist...I believe there are about 3 million competition licences worldwide. -Perry McCarthy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
I also don't recall ever "admitting" that i am "in love" with anyone, including SV. That implies some sort of romantic attachment that doesn't exist. Just like the "overheating" theory you attributed to me, that doesn't exist either. Just like KERS systems on EITHER red bull car in the AUS 2011 race (which you alluded to).

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:56 pm
Posts: 379
Peter77 wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
Johnston wrote:
The Alternator problem was a known one before the season started I believe but Renault didn't sort it and the Red Bull design exasperated the problem I think.

as for the KERS on Marks car Ashley has a very good theory on that. I'll let her explain it herself.

I almost forgot I had a theory! Thanks for the reminder. Also, Adrian said in Austin that Renault has been suffering the same type of alternator failure since testing in 2005.

Back to my theory. Drivers don't use KERS the same way. Not only can you choose where to deploy KERS energy and how much to use, you can also choose the rate at which the energy is harvested from your rear axle, which in turn affects engine braking. We all know the Pirellis aren't very good at doing two things at once - you want to brake AND turn in? No, sorry, choose one or the other.

I think Mark's KERS problems come from using harvesting settings that are outside the happy place for the components, and I think he uses those harvesting rates because it has the desired effect on braking that suits his style. He is always slow in, fast out, while his teammate is fast in, slow out. A greater harvesting rate and more "abrupt" input to the tires could also explain why Mark seems to use up his tires sooner in that first stint that in teammate, almost all the time. Further, whenever Mark loses KERS his performance seems MORE affected than anyone else who loses it. He gets MUCH slower, which to me indicates he's losing performance not just from the lack of the power boost, but also the help under braking.

He also never seems surprised or makes a big stink about the KERS failures, which makes me think they understand why its happening (if I can come up with this they certainly can) and have decided that the benefits of using it in that manner outweigh the potential failures.

I've also read a lot about the possibility that RBR uses a sort of two stage KERS system - where they store some energy in battery packs like the rest of the teams, and some in supercaps. The difference being that the supercaps can deliver the energy more quickly than the battery packs, but that the battery packs hold the energy for longer and can deliver it more smoothly. What I don't know is how that kind of setup would influence harvesting, but I imagine it could magnify the problem for Mark.


Ashley in 2011 when KERS came back from before the race even started Marks KERS and suspension and who knows what else was not working before he even got the grid while vettel's KERS worked fine.
It was brocken before Webber even started his brand new car.

2012 first race of the season in melbourne brand new KERS did not work in qualifying yet again where vettel's was fine and Webber outqualified him with no KERS.
Webbers KERS in 2012 was brocken from day 1 both years. brand new RB7 and brand new RB8 both had problems on first day in melbourne . Not from Webber overusing it or overheating it or whatever other theory Ashley will come up with.
Overheating theories of yours have merit when the problems happen on lap 40 on a very hot day when Webber was pushing to the maximum for the win. Not on the first day in a brand new car before you even start the car in the garage where its nice and air conditioned. LOL

Stop claiming Webber is somehow overusing his KERS causing it to overheat or fail when its brocken from day 1 . If this topic comes up in another 100 threads you will over and over again come up with new high tech essays and theories why Webber damaged his KERS or overheated it or drives differently. It's good you admit you are in love with Vettel in other threads but stop making up theories to prove outright lies and fiction when you know they are not true as the facts speak for themsleves.

2011 100% brand new RB7 in melbourne KERS did not work .
2012 another brand new car RB8 and co-incidence KERS did not work on the first day racing. While Vettels KERS worked fine.


:lol: :lol: :lol: Hook, line and sinker. Ashley most of your posts are valid and interesting but at times your 'love' for vettel clouds your judgement.

_________________
Image


Last edited by diablof1 on Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:44 pm
Posts: 430
Amongst competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected(and is probably the one closest to the truth). Should be easy to see which one when speaking of Webbers KERS issues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 4898
Can anyone who actually believes Webber gets lesser parts than Vettel explain to me why it would make sense to handicap Webber with lesser material, thus directly enabling Alonso to be one place closer to Vettel in lots of races?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:44 pm
Posts: 430
mds wrote:
Can anyone who actually believes Webber gets lesser parts than Vettel explain to me why it would make sense to handicap Webber with lesser material, thus directly enabling Alonso to be one place closer to Vettel in lots of races?


I think what some are suggesting is that Vettel got the newer parts quicker than Webber towards the end of the season. And that makes perfect sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 6:42 pm
Posts: 29
Herbalist wrote:
Amongst competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected(and is probably the one closest to the truth). Should be easy to see which one when speaking of Webbers KERS issues.


History of F1 is filled to the brim with conspiracies, so it is less of an assumption.
Better would be to look at the motives. If they have one part, it would be logical to give it to Vettel. To purposely hold Webber back, what gain is there to be found? There are other ways to make sure Vettel stays on top that are far less detrimental to the team's performance e.g. strategy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 1:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 4898
Herbalist wrote:
mds wrote:
Can anyone who actually believes Webber gets lesser parts than Vettel explain to me why it would make sense to handicap Webber with lesser material, thus directly enabling Alonso to be one place closer to Vettel in lots of races?


I think what some are suggesting is that Vettel got the newer parts quicker than Webber towards the end of the season. And that makes perfect sense.


The whole thread revolves around wat Domenicali said:
Quote:
Why does Webber have so many failures on his car? Because the best parts go to the driver getting the better results.


This is not just about newer parts imo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:56 pm
Posts: 379
diablof1 wrote:
Peter77 wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
Johnston wrote:
The Alternator problem was a known one before the season started I believe but Renault didn't sort it and the Red Bull design exasperated the problem I think.

as for the KERS on Marks car Ashley has a very good theory on that. I'll let her explain it herself.

I almost forgot I had a theory! Thanks for the reminder. Also, Adrian said in Austin that Renault has been suffering the same type of alternator failure since testing in 2005.

Back to my theory. Drivers don't use KERS the same way. Not only can you choose where to deploy KERS energy and how much to use, you can also choose the rate at which the energy is harvested from your rear axle, which in turn affects engine braking. We all know the Pirellis aren't very good at doing two things at once - you want to brake AND turn in? No, sorry, choose one or the other.

I think Mark's KERS problems come from using harvesting settings that are outside the happy place for the components, and I think he uses those harvesting rates because it has the desired effect on braking that suits his style. He is always slow in, fast out, while his teammate is fast in, slow out. A greater harvesting rate and more "abrupt" input to the tires could also explain why Mark seems to use up his tires sooner in that first stint that in teammate, almost all the time. Further, whenever Mark loses KERS his performance seems MORE affected than anyone else who loses it. He gets MUCH slower, which to me indicates he's losing performance not just from the lack of the power boost, but also the help under braking.

He also never seems surprised or makes a big stink about the KERS failures, which makes me think they understand why its happening (if I can come up with this they certainly can) and have decided that the benefits of using it in that manner outweigh the potential failures.

I've also read a lot about the possibility that RBR uses a sort of two stage KERS system - where they store some energy in battery packs like the rest of the teams, and some in supercaps. The difference being that the supercaps can deliver the energy more quickly than the battery packs, but that the battery packs hold the energy for longer and can deliver it more smoothly. What I don't know is how that kind of setup would influence harvesting, but I imagine it could magnify the problem for Mark.


Ashley in 2011 when KERS came back from before the race even started Marks KERS and suspension and who knows what else was not working before he even got the grid while vettel's KERS worked fine.
It was brocken before Webber even started his brand new car.

2012 first race of the season in melbourne brand new KERS did not work in qualifying yet again where vettel's was fine and Webber outqualified him with no KERS.
Webbers KERS in 2012 was brocken from day 1 both years. brand new RB7 and brand new RB8 both had problems on first day in melbourne . Not from Webber overusing it or overheating it or whatever other theory Ashley will come up with.
Overheating theories of yours have merit when the problems happen on lap 40 on a very hot day when Webber was pushing to the maximum for the win. Not on the first day in a brand new car before you even start the car in the garage where its nice and air conditioned. LOL

Stop claiming Webber is somehow overusing his KERS causing it to overheat or fail when its brocken from day 1 . If this topic comes up in another 100 threads you will over and over again come up with new high tech essays and theories why Webber damaged his KERS or overheated it or drives differently. It's good you admit you are in love with Vettel in other threads but stop making up theories to prove outright lies and fiction when you know they are not true as the facts speak for themsleves.

2011 100% brand new RB7 in melbourne KERS did not work .
2012 another brand new car RB8 and co-incidence KERS did not work on the first day racing. While Vettels KERS worked fine.


:lol: :lol: :lol: Hook, line and sinker. Ashley most of your posts are valid and interesting but at times your 'love' for vettel clouds your judgement.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
Its not even a matter of judgement. When I see an inconsistency - such as KERS failing on one car more than the other - I look at all the evidence, facts, and knowledge available to me, and try to understand why that inconsistency exists.

If you guys are really that hung up on the fact that it makes no sense to technically hinder a competitive #2, in a very public and embarrassing (for the team) way, then you must not understand the sport or understand common sense ;) Further, nobody has supplied an idea of what components of the system on Mark's car might differ from Seb's, in what capacity they are "less good", and how or why they fail. I'm happy to entertain any well thought-out idea that is based in fact, but "they favor Seb so Mark gets bad stuff" is an empty statement.

If I can say here is what I think the problem is, and this is how and why I think it happens, why can't you guys?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 30, 2012 9:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:56 pm
Posts: 379
ashley313 wrote:
I also don't recall ever "admitting" that i am "in love" with anyone, including SV. That implies some sort of romantic attachment that doesn't exist. Just like the "overheating" theory you attributed to me, that doesn't exist either. Just like KERS systems on EITHER red bull car in the AUS 2011 race (which you alluded to).



Image

Just for ashley :lol:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:35 am
Posts: 787
ashley313 wrote:
I also don't recall ever "admitting" that i am "in love" with anyone, including SV. That implies some sort of romantic attachment that doesn't exist. Just like the "overheating" theory you attributed to me, that doesn't exist either. Just like KERS systems on EITHER red bull car in the AUS 2011 race (which you alluded to).



Ashley almost every post you make alludes to your extreme love for vettel.
Here's 1 .
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5570&start=80

"Honestly speaking - I'm pretty sure if I ran into him somewhere I'd just pass out on the spot. Hopefully he'd notice and come to my aid, and hopefully I'd require mouth to mouth resuscitation."

Fainting at the sight of him and wanting mouth to mouth is way more than being in love. More than an infatuation. It's an obsession.
You lie and make up anything to prove your point in every one of your posts . You even just went as far saying your not in love with him when you are by far the biggest Vettel lover fanboy on this forum maybe the entire internet.

You say almost anything to make him out to be greatest thing since slice bread while ignoring every single fact and information that comes your way. Even now claiming Webber uses his KERS in a way causing it to fail when it fails all the time before he even had a chance to use it from day 1 in 2011. Almost every race he has problems and early on.

The next theory im waiting for from you and surprised you havent said it yet is that Webber is such a big strong tall guy compared to Vettel that he presses the KERS button too hard and breaks it that way.

_________________
"It was like I was in a tunnel. Not only the tunnel under the hotel but the whole circuit was a tunnel. I was just going and going, more and more and more and more. I was way over the limit but still able to find even more." Ayrton Senna


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
First of all, thinking somebody is attractive and talented doesn't equal being in love. I save my love for people I've actually you know, MET in real life.

Second, what have I lied about or made up?

Lastly, I'm pretty sure I've never said SV is the greatest anything. In fact, there are numerous posts throughout the forum in which I've detailed his weaknesses. Further, my post in this thread about what I think happens to Mark's KERS has NOTHING to do with SV, or who is better or worse. I only mentioned him at all to highlight that Mark might carry less speed at entry and more at exit, as evidence to explain why I think what I posted.

If you don't like my explanation, don't believe it. There's no need to attack me for posting something I've clearly labeled as a theory (one which other people also believe has merit). Prove it wrong if you think it is. I've already asked you to identify some parts that could be of lesser quality on one setup, and to explain how and why that might lead to failures. That even ignores the fact that it makes no sense to purposely technically hinder one driver throughout the season when you've made it clear you value the Constructors' title. So far your only basis to refute it is that Mark's KERS has failed at the beginning of the race - but the parts are used prior to that, they don't start every session with 100% fresh components - so that doesn't hold water either.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:32 am
Posts: 1840
Peter77 wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
I also don't recall ever "admitting" that i am "in love" with anyone, including SV. That implies some sort of romantic attachment that doesn't exist. Just like the "overheating" theory you attributed to me, that doesn't exist either. Just like KERS systems on EITHER red bull car in the AUS 2011 race (which you alluded to).



Ashley almost every post you make alludes to your extreme love for vettel.
Here's 1 .
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5570&start=80

"Honestly speaking - I'm pretty sure if I ran into him somewhere I'd just pass out on the spot. Hopefully he'd notice and come to my aid, and hopefully I'd require mouth to mouth resuscitation."

Fainting at the sight of him and wanting mouth to mouth is way more than being in love. More than an infatuation. It's an obsession.
You lie and make up anything to prove your point in every one of your posts . You even just went as far saying your not in love with him when you are by far the biggest Vettel lover fanboy on this forum maybe the entire internet.


You say almost anything to make him out to be greatest thing since slice bread while ignoring every single fact and information that comes your way. Even now claiming Webber uses his KERS in a way causing it to fail when it fails all the time before he even had a chance to use it from day 1 in 2011. Almost every race he has problems and early on.

The next theory im waiting for from you and surprised you havent said it yet is that Webber is such a big strong tall guy compared to Vettel that he presses the KERS button too hard and breaks it that way.


Oh dear. I saw this years ago when Alonso fans dared to go against the prevailing opinion and dared to come to the table armed with supporting arguments and wouldn't back down to "can only win with team orders/best car/he supports racism/" etc etc.

It doesn't make them popular and the easier thing to do rather than hold hands up and say "sorry, I'm wrong/I can't prove my point" is to hurl insults and yell "fanboy." I haven't seen you use facts so far Peter, just suppositions masquerading as facts while, ironically, accusing others of ignoring facts.

_________________
The underlying thing about all this,no matter how bright you are,no matter how logical one is or how much money one has,you have to be a completely stupid optimist...I believe there are about 3 million competition licences worldwide. -Perry McCarthy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:35 am
Posts: 787
Oh my your still going lol

Every single person who looks at it logically knows Webber has the inferior KERS parts package than Vettels.
How else can you explain the 100s of problem he has at the most crucial times like qualifying when vettel has none.
The only problem Vettel might have is on a very hot day after 1.5 hours of pushing the car ot the limit and its hotter than the sun that a part like KERS fails. This is 100% normal due to overheating.
Parts failing when they are cold almost every race in qualifying is not normal
This is what Ferrari boss was talking about when he said Webber has inferior parts.
KERS failing in the garage when its cold time and time and time and time and time again . Even on day 1 in qualifying 2011 is more than a co incidence

The ferrari boss who knows 1000 times more than a Vettel loverboy about F1 knows something is up. He wasnt just talking hot air as he offered Webber a drive. Ferrari boss backed up what he is saying . He knows Webber has the inferior parts and he said it straight out and offered him the drive at the most prestigious time in F1. That alone says a million times more than any fanboy comments here who post comments all day long how Webber gets equal treatment and equal parts.

_________________
"It was like I was in a tunnel. Not only the tunnel under the hotel but the whole circuit was a tunnel. I was just going and going, more and more and more and more. I was way over the limit but still able to find even more." Ayrton Senna


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:35 am
Posts: 787
Here is another case of the best parts going to Vettel and preference.

Webber is not known to be the best starter yes we know this.
But with the right clutch package and obviously now he has gotten better he can get a decent start with the right package and I will prove it once and for all.
2011 position change after 1 lap . race by race

Australia 0
Malaysia -6
China (Started from back of the grid due to qualifying error and not using soft tyres.)
Turkish -1
Spanish -2
Monaco -1
Canada (Everybody started behind safety car due to wet weather)
Europe 0
British -1
German -1
Hungary -2
Belgium -5
Italian -2
Singapore -2

NEW CLUTCH

Japan 0
Korea +1
India -1
Abu Dhabi 0
Brazil 0

Average position change with faulty clutch in first 12 races minus when he started back of the grid in China and the safety car start in canada as they dont count -1.92
Average position change last 5 races with non faulty clutch 0

This does not tell the entire story as the beggining he was always defending due to herendous starts , He was lucky to not lose 5 places in most races due to defending the crappy launches.
Last 5 races he was basically attacking he had such amazing take offs compared to the begging of the year.

If you see the races with new clutch and old clutch you will see a massive massive difference.

Now if anybody is from Australia every day thats all they were saying on the F1 channel why is hes take offs so bad , whats happened , whats going on this is crazy. The aussie sports commentator even interviewed Horner about this and he made up some story about the clutch working fine.
But after vettel sowed up the championship in Japan they finally decided to change his clutch.
If vettel had a clutch problem it would have been fixed in 1 race not 14 races and season is over.

The question is when Vettel struggles with a part which he does all the time the team will do anythign to fix the problem.
And i mean anything
In 2010 when Webber stomped on Vettel at monaco the track which seperates the men from the boys what happened. Vettel sooked and the team immediately worked night and day and spent god knows how much designing an entire new chassis claiming it was faulty but then later giving it to Webber.
That year the team went over budget to the tune of like 450 million i heard so that new chassis alone they built him might have cost 10 million maybe even 50 million . Who knows but whatever it was the team bent over backwards to make Vettel a faster chassis and it was slightly faster than Webbers and the balance of power shifted.
No such treatment was given to Webber.

This is what ferrari boss is talking about.
They also took parts like the wing of Webber's car in 2010 to give to vettel when Webber was clearly in contention and leading the championship at that stage. Massive preferance and we can show a video about this here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z51QddEkkg

In 2012 earlier in the season vettel struggled and the team went crazy trying to change every single part to get him performing again quicker.
I remember an interview with him on australian TV on One HD after he won in bahrain after struggling so much earlier in the season he gave an interview that shocked me . He said I cant thank the team enough they were working day and night round the clock they havent slept tryign out new parts. He said they tried 100s of parts and finally got a package that works.
Thats right ill repeat 100sssssssss of parts
Cost wise they would have thrown maybe 50 million at these parts im guessing just to make Vettel faster as we all know the insane amounts Redbull has been spending.
100s of parts when he didnt like the way the car performed and the rear end not sticking .
Webber clutch problem = 0 parts changed this year at all.
2012 the clutch for him was a joke.
In 2011 the end of the season they fixed his clutch and it worked fine last 6 races.
Yet This year all year they have not bothered fixing or changing parts to fix his clutch problem
Talk about massive preferential treatment and favouritism for Vettel.

When you have Adrian Newey the best designer trying out 100s of parts to find out what suits you to make you faster of course Redbull will be the best. 100s of new parts surely will give you extra time over your team mate just designed around you. 90% of it is the car in F1 we all know this. You could even claimn 100% because i can say 100% Vettel , Hamilton or Alonso would never ever win in a HRT .

When Webber had the clutch problem 100s of parts werent tried out to fix it .
Guess how many parts were tried ?
Yep you gussed it for 14 races it was 0
Obviously it was an easy fix as right after Japan they reverted to old package and bam problem solved.
But they decided to spend $0 and 0 time on this as Horner admiited it on ONE HD in australia tv interview i saw.
Literally one HD said we have been inundadted by letters and emails asking us to explain Webbers clutch problems so we will answer those questions. They had an entire segment about it by interviewing Horner.

A simple clutch revert fixed his take off and he had perfect take offs in the last 6 races .
2012 they did not even bother fixing his clutch at all as he struggled with the new clutch in the RB8 yet again.
When the clutch is working Webber takes off fine by looks of things. The stats i pasted above prove this and if you watch the first 14 races in 2011 with old clutch and then last 6 races with new clutch you will see how with the right clutch Webber is a decent starter. Not the best but defiantely not the worst.

Webber does not get entirely new chasiss built for him like vettel did . When Vettel has a problem with the car not to his liking we have seen the redbull team will work day and night and spend 100s of millions of dollars if necessary to fix the problem and even take parts of Webbers car to make him quicker.
We all know this.
Any driver who had this luxury would win 3 years in a row especially when driving the ulmighty redbull by the words best F1 designer Newey.

Poor Webber even the smallest problems with clutch never get fixed or 1 dollar spent rectifying it.
Horner even admiited it in an interview that nothing was done and trying to give technical explanation of how a clutch is released and how it works and how its fine.

He admiited nothing was done time wise or money wise. Finally in Japan they did something though and problem fixed instantly. If it was Webber's fault and not the clutch the problem would not have magically rectified with a different clutch.

But yes the ferrari boss is right all the best parts are part on Vettel's car.

_________________
"It was like I was in a tunnel. Not only the tunnel under the hotel but the whole circuit was a tunnel. I was just going and going, more and more and more and more. I was way over the limit but still able to find even more." Ayrton Senna


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 4:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:32 am
Posts: 1840
Peter77 wrote:
Oh my your still going lol

Every single person who looks at it logically knows Webber has the inferior KERS parts package than Vettels.
How else can you explain the 100s of problem he has at the most crucial times like qualifying when vettel has none.
The only problem Vettel might have is on a very hot day after 1.5 hours of pushing the car ot the limit and its hotter than the sun that a part like KERS fails. This is 100% normal due to overheating.
Parts failing when they are cold almost every race in qualifying is not normal
This is what Ferrari boss was talking about when he said Webber has inferior parts.
KERS failing in the garage when its cold time and time and time and time and time again . Even on day 1 in qualifying 2011 is more than a co incidence

The ferrari boss who knows 1000 times more than a Vettel loverboy about F1 knows something is up. He wasnt just talking hot air as he offered Webber a drive. Ferrari boss backed up what he is saying . He knows Webber has the inferior parts and he said it straight out and offered him the drive at the most prestigious time in F1. That alone says a million times more than any fanboy comments here who post comments all day long how Webber gets equal treatment and equal parts.


As I wrote before, I'm going to listen to someone who has a knowledge of Red Bull's technical specs and doesn't have a vested interest in causing friction in another team. Domenicali may be right but he has a vested interest, he may be right, but we don't have proof he is right. You have chosen to believe Domenicali because it fits with your opinion. You have defined logic through your own parameters, where logic is what you say and anything else is what you disagree with. You have created a self-fulfilling tautology devoid of real, supporting facts. Your links to the events have all been suppositions so far.

I am maintaining an open mind until I see evidence, not opinions that are backed up with suppositions, phrases such as "how else" metaphors "hotter than the sun" and exaggerations "a million times," and in general I find it very difficult to respect any comment that includes the word fanboy because it is usually written as an insult, rather than attached to a poster who is genuinely blinded by bias. That has brought the "lol" out with you. "Every single person who looks at it logically...." Really? Did you ever read 1984?: "a minority of one is not insane."

I'm intrigued by your focus on how KERS should not fail at relatively "cool" periods, setting aside that even when idling the temperatures inside an F1 car are very hot. I am no expert on the engineering of these devices, but I have an inkling that they are complex enough that they could conceivably fail in other ways. I would like to see your evidence why KERS should not fail on a Red Bull car at those times, using a technical explanation of the KERS pack, not a simple use of statistics on how many times Webbers car failed and when, because good luck and bad luck is involved in F1 too.

_________________
The underlying thing about all this,no matter how bright you are,no matter how logical one is or how much money one has,you have to be a completely stupid optimist...I believe there are about 3 million competition licences worldwide. -Perry McCarthy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 5:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
Peter - please cite some references documenting that when Mark's KERS has failed it has been due to overheating, and explain what parts in the KERS system overheat, and how.

To answer your question "How else could he have so many problems?" - well, I supplied a theory based in how things work. You just said he has bad parts, and despite my asking multiple times for an explanation of which parts, why they are bad, and how they fail, you haven't given one. Basically all you've come up with is "Webber has bad parts because I say so".

Or really, you think Webber has bad parts because you don't understand fully how KERS works? Your insistence that the failures are only due to overheating further highlights that. There are many components in the KERS systems that can fail in ways that have absolutely nothing to do with temperature. Wiring problems, too much or too little voltage in any part of the system, a bad MGU or PCU (Magneti Marelli supplies those too- must be part of the whole alternator/Ferrari conspiracy right?), even the batteries can fail. Hell, a KERS battery failure at the RBR factory created enough smoke to need the fire department to clean up, and that was before Sebastian even got there. And fwiw the failing battery is what can cause overheating - the cell fails, and that causes the battery to overheat quickly, not necessarily the other way round. Which has nothing to do with how long its been in use or what the ambient temp is.

As for Mark's clutch - how do you know what resources were used to fix the problem? Most teams don't publicize their problem solving flow charts if you know what I mean. And do you know that whatever clutch you think helped Mark have improved starts didn't have some other negative drawback that outweighed the benefit of using it at the start? No, you don't, because we aren't privy to the teams' technical data.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:56 pm
Posts: 379
Peter77 wrote:
ashley313 wrote:
I also don't recall ever "admitting" that i am "in love" with anyone, including SV. That implies some sort of romantic attachment that doesn't exist. Just like the "overheating" theory you attributed to me, that doesn't exist either. Just like KERS systems on EITHER red bull car in the AUS 2011 race (which you alluded to).



Ashley almost every post you make alludes to your extreme love for vettel.
Here's 1 .
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5570&start=80

"Honestly speaking - I'm pretty sure if I ran into him somewhere I'd just pass out on the spot. Hopefully he'd notice and come to my aid, and hopefully I'd require mouth to mouth resuscitation."

Fainting at the sight of him and wanting mouth to mouth is way more than being in love. More than an infatuation. It's an obsession.
You lie and make up anything to prove your point in every one of your posts . You even just went as far saying your not in love with him when you are by far the biggest Vettel lover fanboy on this forum maybe the entire internet.

You say almost anything to make him out to be greatest thing since slice bread while ignoring every single fact and information that comes your way. Even now claiming Webber uses his KERS in a way causing it to fail when it fails all the time before he even had a chance to use it from day 1 in 2011. Almost every race he has problems and early on.

The next theory im waiting for from you and surprised you havent said it yet is that Webber is such a big strong tall guy compared to Vettel that he presses the KERS button too hard and breaks it that way.


:o
I think she just has a crush on him which is fine, not a obsession.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:29 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Wrexham, UK
I'd probably feint and require mouth to mouth if Charlize Theron was in my vicinity (mouth to mouth preferably from her, and then a big hug. Preferably it would be raining, and in slow motion, with explosions nearby to add to the epic. She'd never forget that.)

Doesn't mean I love her, not an obsession. Somehow feinting and requiring mouth to mouth from Seb doesn't strike me as obsession either. If anything, I imagine Seb would be useful in such a situation, I imagine him to be a very kind person and knowledgeable of life saving techniques.

_________________
"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 12:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 10:45 am
Posts: 1322
Location: Sydney, Australia
I don't always agree with ashley313 but I find it rather insulting that you have relegated her answers to either having a crush on Vettel &/or an obsession. Why? Because she is a female & somehow, if that's the case, you feel superior?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 6:41 pm
Posts: 6587
DrG wrote:
I don't always agree with ashley313 but I find it rather insulting that you have relegated her answers to either having a crush on Vettel &/or an obsession. Why? Because she is a female & somehow, if that's the case, you feel superior?


Some blokes feel threatened by women involved with motorsports. Then they get all defensive as they start beating their chest :lol: :lol:


It's the same when a bloke goes to get the car fixed and the mechanic turns out to be a girl. Some blokes just dinnae like it.

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 1:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
DrG wrote:
I don't always agree with ashley313 but I find it rather insulting that you have relegated her answers to either having a crush on Vettel &/or an obsession. Why? Because she is a female & somehow, if that's the case, you feel superior?

Don't forget, I'm also lying and making everything up. Perhaps someone has some trust issues with women.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:29 pm
Posts: 1376
Location: Wrexham, UK
ashley313 wrote:
DrG wrote:
I don't always agree with ashley313 but I find it rather insulting that you have relegated her answers to either having a crush on Vettel &/or an obsession. Why? Because she is a female & somehow, if that's the case, you feel superior?

Don't forget, I'm also lying and making everything up. Perhaps someone has some trust issues with women.

Stop lying.

_________________
"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
Damn, busted :lol:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2012 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 5:26 pm
Posts: 804
Location: Ontario, Canada
If Ashley must be in love with Vettel, then by that logic, Peter must be in love with Webber?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 4:35 am
Posts: 787
The thread was about ferrari boss claiming that Vettel gets better parts than Webber. This is definately the case and I have cited many examples to prove this. People asked for proof to show 1 example how they are not treated equally and I have done that. I listed a few points which the fanboys ignore for some reason.

So many people are going way off topic.
If you want to prove a counter point that vettel and Webber have 100% equal parts and support then show some examples or somethign to prove otherwise.
None of you can prove that they are treated 100% equally hence why you go off on tangents ignoring all the facts.

Ferrari boss was correct.

Ashley you keep saying the same things over and over again. I explained how I know about the Clutch problem but i will explain it again for the last time. Im not going to bother after this replying as you ignore all the common sense and facts I explain every single time.

Being that I live in Australia they tend to show an insane amount of Webber coverage and redbull coverage of the garage and what goes on. They even have a Webber report and alot of Webber interviews and alot of Christian Horner interviews in the garage.
They have alot of redbull interviews that are just for Australian TV. As Webber is australian so they show a lot of coverage about him. They also show alot of coverage about his team mate due to him also being with redbull and the WDC.

Ashley the clutch problem was discussed in great detail on the Australian One HD channel where they stated absolutely nothing was done to fix the problem untill Japan . They literally asked about the starts and discussed it in almost every single race. Its quite big news when Webber is always struggling off the start. They had entire segments about this. Horner admiited it in an interview. Not a single change was made till Japan. Case closed. I also posted facts to prove the massive difference it made when changed with 1st lap results after Japan and before Japan if you bothered to read it.
Horner said we changed nothing or done nothing and all he in interview did was explain how the clutch gets released and how the cars take off and that Mark's not getting the timing perfect etc etc etc. It was an entire 5 min interview about the clutch.
He said there is nothing wrong with the clutch. And also that nothing was changed all year.
Finally in Japan they decided to make a tiny tiny change to old clutch and bam Webbers starts were perfect for the last 6 races.


Its like Vettel at the beggining of the year nothing was broken on the redbull but he struggled with the rear end.
He said im struggling and the team tried 100s of new parts and spent a good maybe 50 million to make him quicker.
Thats what its about. Not about something brocken but improving performance when you are struggling.
Webber and Vettel both struggle with many parts throughout the course of the year. Vettel though is the priority with most of the teams resources going towards him.
Thats what ferrari boss is talking about

If Vettel struggled with a clutch it would be changed , rear end , front wing whatever part if he struggled it will be changed no questions asked to find a better solution.
Thats what the Ferrari boss is talking about.
Its not about brocken or faulty parts.
F1 is about maximum perfornace from the parts as we all know.

When Vettel has the tinniest problem they team will work overnight to fix it and throw millions at the problem to make Vettel faster. If Webber has a problem nothing is done or its a low priority for the team. Clutch problem proves this.
The team was so busy for 3/4 of the entire year working on the RB7 which proved to be 1 of the most dominant cars F1 has ever seen in the hands of Vettel. With a huge budget of 450 million or so and teams working round the clock how can they not have time to improve his clutch the entire year til Japan??
Thats what Ferrari boss is talking about


When Vettel struggled after Monaco in 2010 entire new chassis was built just for him at a cost of maybe 10 - 50 million.
When Webber needed a new chassis after the crash no new chassis was built but the old vettel chassis was given to him.
The redbull team just doesn't spend the same money or give equal treatment to Webber.
Thats what Ferrari boss is talking about.

This year earlier in the year vettel struggled the team worked round the clock trying 100s of new parts to make the car better suited to Vettel. They work round the clock and spend 100s of millions to make vettel quicker.
The same treatment is not given to Webber thats what Ferrari boss is talking about.

Even after all thats happened at Redbull ashley and the other vettel loverboys will insist till the day they die that Webber and vettel are treated equally and that the Ferrari boss was wrong as thats what this thread is about.
Why can't they admit the truth and say hey ill be honest Vettel and Webber are not treated equally?
Because if they do it will take some shine off Vettel's WDC and we could never ever ever have that.
We coulld never ever admit it was the car or Newey or the 450 million biggest budget in F1 or the team favouritism that contributed to vettels wins in any way shape or form.

Its all 100% vettel and nobody else. He had no favouritism and no advantages in any way whatsoever and he certainly didn't have the fastest car on the grid 3 years in a row.

The Ferrari boss is wrong according to Ashley . Both drivers were both treated 100% equally and always have been.
Not even half way through the 2010 season when Webber and Vettel were fighting for the championship and the Redbull team went on TV stating both our drivers are treated 100% equally. Redbull said it so it mught be true . then this came to air.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z51QddEkkg

But wait look at the video above how could this be.
Ashley will surely ask for technical data to back the video above up or some further data to prove it as the video is 100% fake according to him. if we dont have a retinal scan , finger print analysis , DNA sampling , video foresnsic specialist and sound analyst to check it was real then it has no credibility as it takes some shine off Vettel and we could never ever have that.

Ashley this video above must be CGI or hollywood special effects. Please ignore it.

Webber and Vettel are both treated 100% equally according to this thread which is what it is about.
Looks like the ferrari boss was wrong and Ashley was correct.

_________________
"It was like I was in a tunnel. Not only the tunnel under the hotel but the whole circuit was a tunnel. I was just going and going, more and more and more and more. I was way over the limit but still able to find even more." Ayrton Senna


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2013 3:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
Do you actually read what I type? I'm asking because your responses hardly have anything to do with what I've said, and never answer any of the questions I pose to you.

Re: Clutches
I don't watch Australian TV so I can only go by what YOU said here - if Christian said Mark wasn't getting the timing right, then that's his problem, not a fault with the clutch, so why WOULD they change it? And again, you don't know if a different clutch would have had negative drawbacks that outweighed the better start.

Re: KERS
You haven't proven anything. Have you abandoned the KERS discussion all together? Cause I'm STILL waiting to hear which components are substandard, in what way, and how they fail.

Re: Equal Treatment
Firstly, having equal quality components and being treated equally are two separate things, and I've actually never said Mark gets 100% of either. I do believe he gets the same quality parts, and I believe he is treated equally until he no longer has as good a shot at the title as his teammate.

If RBR never helped Mark solve any problems, why would he stay there? Second, where are you getting your 50 million figure from in regards to upgrades made to the RB8 specifically for SV? Is that dollars, british pounds, euros? Who gave you a look at their books? Or, what background do you have in design, fab, and sim to know what it might cost to conceptualize, create, and test the various upgrade packages? Did none of the upgrades help Mark either? Is it not possible the upgrades over the course of the season were designed to make the CAR faster, for BOTH drivers? Because maybe, just maybe, it makes sense to have both drivers have a competitive chance when you're seeking a third constructors' title?

Re: Me vs. Stefano
All I've done is post a reasonable explanation for the failures of Mark's car. Stefano hasn't explained what he meant, or given any evidence - and he doesn't need to. Ferrari, and plenty of other teams, are famous for using quotes to the press to put pressure on their competitors, disrupt their flow, stress relationships, etc. They are also taking a lot of heat at the moment for their primary and secondary driver system, and the grid penalty situation with Massa. It makes sense to say "hey, we might do that..but look - so do those guys who won." If not for strategic PR, why make the statement at all? He doesn't care about Mark or what parts go on his car. He has nothing to gain with the statement other than trying to disrupt a rival team and make his team look better, and whether what he said is true or not, the outcome is the same.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2013 4:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:11 pm
Posts: 3029
In addition to those questions about the KERS parts, I'm still waiting on answers to:

1) What did I lie about or make up?
2) What evidence do you have that Mark's KERS failures were due to overheating?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2013 4:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 2684
I suspect that most/all of us will agree that Webber is treated as a number 2 driver by RBR. But most/all of us will probably agree that he's unlikely to receive inferior parts as it would be stupid (not to mention impossible) for RBR to obtain specially inferior parts for Webber.

BUT, when for some reason there's only one new part available to the team (e.g. the wing episode...), that new part will be given to Seb - even if it means taking it off Mark's car.... So yes, IMO Seb enjoys No. 1 status at RBR.

HOWEVER, RBR have not yet taken it to the same extremes as Ferrari with Alonso - specifically, making their No. 2 driver take a 5 place grid penalty to help the No. 1 driver.

Additionally, IIRC Mark has never deliberately allowed Seb to overtake him on track - whereas Massa has gone out of his way to help Alonso at a few races this season.

Ferrari have always had a clear No. 1 since I started watching F1, but it has rarely been as bad as it has this season. Personally, I have no problem with a No. 1 driver enjoying the best race strategy, but (IMO) the favouritism has got out of hand. I was angry about the (earlier season) Webber wing episode, but it was only one episode. Edit - Just remembered Mark being dragged in for a pit stop this season when he wouldn't let Seb pass. So make that 2 really bad episodes, one of which was this season.

Luca is just trying to justify the obvious advantages Alonso has received this season at Massa's expense.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AngusWolfe, Google Adsense [Bot], Gumption, pubpokerplayer, shoot999, Zoue and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group