58 replies to this topic

[monza gorilla]

ykickamoocow, on Feb 2 2007, 03:39 PM, said:

He hasnt. On its day the FW28 was one of the fastest in the midfeild but that can hardly be considered a fast car. The best car Webber has ever driven in F1 was probably the FW27 and that was only good enough for occasional points.

Bahrain last year. Fastest lap was set by? In a what?

[ykickamoocow]

monza gorilla, on Feb 3 2007, 03:02 AM, said:

Bahrain last year. Fastest lap was set by? In a what?

Yes but the only other highlight for Williams in that year was how fast they were at Monaco before they broke down. Based on what you said i could say the Rb2 was fast as it got a podium at Monaco. You cant say it was a fast car based on 1 performance.

[monza gorilla]

Actually my point was that it wasn't Webbo who achieved it. He had, on that day, a fast car. And Nico went quicker..........
I know Mark finished ahead, but I'm just trying to puncture his reputation a bit.

[ykickamoocow]

monza gorilla, on Feb 3 2007, 03:27 AM, said:

Actually my point was that it wasn't Webbo who achieved it. He had, on that day, a fast car. And Nico went quicker..........
I know Mark finished ahead, but I'm just trying to puncture his reputation a bit.

Getting beaten once or twice in a season isnt that bad when you consider there are 19 races each year. Webber won the battle between him as Rosberg easily.

[monza gorilla]

Well, Nico did fall off the road a bit. But the point remains. Mark has had a fast car.

[ykickamoocow]

monza gorilla, on Feb 3 2007, 03:47 AM, said:

Well, Nico did fall off the road a bit. But the point remains. Mark has had a fast car.

I suppose that all depends on your definition of 'a fast car' but i dont really consider a car that is only capable of getting 6th, 7th and 8th with the occasional podium a fast car. The only cars i consider fast are the ones that can get regular podiums which definitely excules all the F1 cars Webber has driven.

[monza gorilla]

To produce fastest lap of a race implies that a car is fast. Doesn't it? So why the poor result in a vehicle capable of setting such a lap time?

[ykickamoocow]

monza gorilla, on Feb 3 2007, 03:59 AM, said:

To produce fastest lap of a race implies that a car is fast. Doesn't it? So why the poor result in a vehicle capable of setting such a lap time?

A combination of factors could have been in play but the fact is that the FW28 was not a fast car. Just because it had 1 highlight in its pitiful career does not change anything.

[Kay]

monza gorilla, on Feb 2 2007, 04:27 PM, said:

Actually my point was that it wasn't Webbo who achieved it. He had, on that day, a fast car. And Nico went quicker..........
I know Mark finished ahead, but I'm just trying to puncture his reputation a bit.

You are taking the first race of the season as an example.

I'll take the last race of the season. Now which is more damaging?

IIRC Rosberg was allowed to turn the 'wick' up a bit towards the end of the race therefore it was not a pace the Williams could do throughout a full race.

[monza gorilla]

Great Scott, people. Why has no one twigged that I'm disagreeing with Ykick purely because it passes the time? Of course Mark has not had a half decent car to show his talent. Of course he'd have more success in a quicker car.  Of course he was better than Nico. You've spoilt my fun now..
Thought occurs, if Nico was allowed to turn the wick up then why not Webbo?

[Sato]

Because Webber was already in the points, Nico wasn't until the end.

[ykickamoocow]

monza gorilla, on Feb 3 2007, 05:31 AM, said:

Great Scott, people. Why has no one twigged that I'm disagreeing with Ykick purely because it passes the time? Of course Mark has not had a half decent car to show his talent. Of course he'd have more success in a quicker car.  Of course he was better than Nico. You've spoilt my fun now..

Your evil  

monza gorilla, on Feb 3 2007, 05:31 AM, said:

Thought occurs, if Nico was allowed to turn the wick up then why not Webbo?

I dont remember the exact circumstances of Rosberg's fastest lap so im not really in a position to comment.

[monza gorilla]

ykickamoocow, on Feb 2 2007, 06:35 PM, said:

Your evil  

Thank you!

[Autumnpuma]

jemstride, on Feb 2 2007, 06:26 AM, said:

hey we cant have double standards now can we; - the williams looked unreliable, so the conclusion is surely that Webber is a carbreaker  

Hmmm...instead of refuting my claims, you have resorted to framing my argument in inaccurate, simplistic terms to make your argument look stronger....not convincing.

ykickamoocow, on Feb 2 2007, 06:32 AM, said:

Except ive never once claimed that Kimi was the cause of all McLarens mechanical problems in 2005 so there is no double standards for me  

Neither have I.

[Kay]

monza gorilla, on Feb 2 2007, 06:31 PM, said:

Great Scott, people. Why has no one twigged that I'm disagreeing with Ykick purely because it passes the time? Of course Mark has not had a half decent car to show his talent. Of course he'd have more success in a quicker car.  Of course he was better than Nico. You've spoilt my fun now..
Thought occurs, if Nico was allowed to turn the wick up then why not Webbo?

Nico had nothing to lose in his position - Webber did (points as Sato said).

[monza gorilla]

How far ahead was JPM?

[Kay]

monza gorilla, on Feb 2 2007, 07:20 PM, said:

How far ahead was JPM?

Dunno, I don't have a lap tracker, however he was being beaten by Kimi and was preoccupied by keep getting taken into turn 1 by Button.

Need a lap chart tracker.

[bathurst1000]

Anyway, Back to the subject it seems that the FW29 has only had few minor aero changes from the FW28 but it is plenty different in terms of the cooling systems and and exaust, these parts are much more bullet proof then last year. this may prevent some of the terrible mechanical issues like with the FW28. INn the way of the livery pretty standard williams not to outlandish, plenty of blue, plenty of white. Gonna be hard to tell between BMW and Williams but never the less should perform better than last year ..........

.........Hopefully...

[Autumnpuma]

Yeah, the similarity between Williams' and BMW's livery is understandable, but odd. It's a little like dumping a bird then seeing her still wear your shirts around town...

Williams need a new livery; leave the Blue/White to BMW.

[Sato]

Williams had blue and white before BMW though.....

[Panchito]

Autumnpuma, on Feb 3 2007, 11:41 PM, said:

Yeah, the similarity between Williams' and BMW's livery is understandable, but odd. It's a little like dumping a bird then seeing her still wear your shirts around town...

Williams need a new livery; leave the Blue/White to BMW.

Sorry, but since the start of Williams F1 Team (which was way before BMW entered F1) they used Blue and White, the exception was the year with Mecachrome, however if anybody as to change is livery (which i dont think is necessary) is BWM not Williams, this is not the case of the "Chicken and the Egg" in this one we know who came first.

[JayStorm]

Yeah, maybe it should be BMW that changes but I really can't see what they would change it to.

And at the moment Williams have few sponsors and could choose pretty much any other colour scheme, why not Purple or Black?

I don't mind, I can distinguish between the two fairly easily, I just like to see some variation down the grid.

[Panchito]

JayStorm, on Feb 6 2007, 01:49 PM, said:

Yeah, maybe it should be BMW that changes but I really can't see what they would change it to.

And at the moment Williams have few sponsors and could choose pretty much any other colour scheme, why not Purple or Black?

I don't mind, I can distinguish between the two fairly easily, I just like to see some variation down the grid.

They aren´t a few as it seems at a first sight, and if you watch closely almost all the sponsors of Williams fit well in blue, AT&T, Lenovo, Philips, RBS are all corporates that use a "blue image", so all in all is the logical choice, but i agree with you, i see no need that one of the teams change is livery.

[JayStorm]

Then I would say in response to that: They could get some new sponsors!

But then I suppose they aren't the team that they were and it could be quite difficult for them.

Hmm, i'm happy as it is.

[Panchito]

JayStorm, on Feb 6 2007, 02:06 PM, said:

Then I would say in response to that: They could get some new sponsors!

But then I suppose they aren't the team that they were and it could be quite difficult for them.

Hmm, i'm happy as it is.

Quite difficult? After a horrible year the team manager to get a total of 80M$ in Lenovo and AT&T i would say it´s amazing and only proves that despiste the lack of recent results the good companies tend to rely on Williams.

[jemstride]

Autumnpuma, on Feb 2 2007, 07:09 PM, said:

Hmmm...instead of refuting my claims, you have resorted to framing my argument in inaccurate, simplistic terms to make your argument look stronger....not convincing.
Neither have I.

i was only messing anyway  

[Autumnpuma]

jemstride, on Feb 6 2007, 05:18 AM, said:

i was only messing anyway  

I know  

[cavallino]

Hmm where are the huge AT&T logos? Interesting to see the Tata logo there and no Toyota logo

[Autumnpuma]

Just shows how stupid AT&T are....they opt for a light blue stripe as advertising on the car instead of their logo.....morons.