Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ecapdeville

Kubica Disqualified, Schumacher In The Points!

73 posts in this topic

Let me know what you find. I trust your judgement :D

Thanks Cav :D

It's about 3 minutes into the highlight reel autumnpuma.

I'm sure it was oversteer after looking at it again. However the better angle to judge is from high above turn 1 which they don't show on the highlight reel.

You be the judge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he was going to score his first point, but what do you know, he got DQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael deserved to finish somewhere in the points, so really I can't complain that he scored one in the end as he drove a good race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
good for Kubica, he didn't get any point for his first race, and for the next race JV will be back.

Er, not anymore!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michael deserved to finish somewhere in the points, so really I can't complain that he scored one in the end as he drove a good race.

yeah he drove very well....mind you alonso did too...so this race both of them were both lucky and unlucky...at some point..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubica's Tires Lost 12lbs Over Race

Written by: Adam Cooper RACER Magazine

Budapest, Hungary – 8/8/2006 Kubica did two full stints on the same set of intermediate tires, which wore out more than the team expected. (LAT Photo)

Robert Kubica’s disqualification in Hungary was caused by an unprecedented loss of 5.5kgs (12.12 pounds) from his worn-out intermediate tires, SPEEDtv.com can reveal.

After the race Kubica’s car was found to be very close to the 600kgs (1323lb) weight limit, so the FIA’s Jo Bauer decided to drain out any remaining fuel to see what its dry weight was. This test is only done occasionally and is what caught out BAR at Imola last year.

Cars have to weigh 600kgs dry or the FIA have to assume that they are capable of running below the limit in the middle of the race before taking on extra fuel at the last stop.

Kubica’s car was apparently around 602kgs dry, and after some 3.5kgs of fuel came out, it was found to be 1.5-2kgs underweight when it was checked and re-checked (the higher figure was later accepted as official).

Like other teams Sauber ballasts its tires so that dries, extreme wets and intermediates all weigh the same new, to avoid any such problems. However, is it well known that intermediates lose weight, so Sauber took account for that by adding 2kgs of weight to the car for the race to ensure that it would still be above the limit.

However that didn’t prove to be enough. Having used the same set of tires for two long stints they almost turned into slicks, and the team discovered after the race that 5.5kgs rather than the expected 2kgs had "disappeared."

A team insider admitted they had not gained much experience of intermediate wear rates since switching from Bridgestone to Michelin.

The FIA decided to drain Nick Heidfeld’s sister car, which had finished on dry tires, and that was found to be legal. And just to make sure they also retrieved the intermediate tires the German had used earlier in the race to see if it was possible that Nick had dipped below the weight limit at any point. They were not used for as long as Kubica’s, and the car was still fully legal with those tires.

However it’s entirely possible that some other cars that used inters for an extended period may have inadvertently dipped below the limit, but since they finished on relatively new dries and were well above the limit, they did not arouse the FIA’s suspicions.

Interestingly Michael Schumacher ran his intermediate tires for as long as Kubica, but since he finished his race in the Ferrari garage, with several laps of fuel still on board, and in a lowly ninth place, he was not subject to a more detailed investigation by way of a fuel drain. Ironically he did of course eventually walk away with a point, courtesy of Kubica.

_____________________________________________________________________

:rolleyes: this is what u edited

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't the faintest idea what he was trying to conceal, it is surely absurd to assume that if BMW screwed up, Ferrari did too. I mean when was the last time a Ferrari was disqualified for being underweight?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I applaud the presentation of the FULL article.

Leading a point by omission is just as bad as leading by falsehood. At least with the full article, people can make up thier own minds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I often pick lines off articles (usually quotes), but always give the full link. The problem is posting false information about what was omitted, and not giving a link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it is surely absurd to assume that if BMW screwed up, Ferrari did too. I mean when was the last time a Ferrari was disqualified for being underweight?

Is it? Michael's tyres looked as though they were missing a considerable amount of rubber...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't Ferraris first wet race, and they deliberately did not change Michael's tyres in his second stop, and with numerous Bridgestone engineers around, they would know what they were doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn't Ferraris first wet race, and they deliberately did not change Michael's tyres in his second stop, and with numerous Bridgestone engineers around, they would know what they were doing.

Lol, they deliberately set Michael up to be about 5 seconds a lap off the pace at the end? They made a mistake in not switching to the dry tyres in the last stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

umm no they made a mistake in not pitting him for drys later (all easy to say now, but it would have paid off if he had finished 4th). They deliberately did not change his inters when he pitted, because inters last longer on a wet(ish) track. Or course, inters get completely screwed on a dry track which is what happened later. Button and Michael pit on exactly the same lap for inters, and I believe they did not change Button's tyres either. Button had the luxury of pitting again later and still be assured of at least a second place, Michael didn't.

Edited by cavallino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think i left that part out due to me being an MS fan i sorry i gave that impression, and i did screw up with not adding the ink, but if you look at the few times i have posted articles i have always given a link or cited my source. i only left out the last paragraph because it had no baring on the point i was trying to make and i wanted to cut down on the reading people had to do. (alot of the time im too lazy to read the full articles here where only the first 3 lines are importaint.) My point being that you cant make up 5.5kilos of tire ware through just picking up clag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
umm no they made a mistake in not pitting him for drys later (all easy to say now, but it would have paid off if he had finished 4th). They deliberately did not change his inters when he pitted, because inters last longer on a wet(ish) track. Or course, inters get completely screwed on a dry track which is what happened later. Button and Michael pit on exactly the same lap for inters, and I believe they did not change Button's tyres either. Button had the luxury of pitting again later and still be assured of at least a second place, Michael didn't.

So they did make a mistake... How on Earth did that happen? This was not Ferrari's first wet race and numerous Bridgestone engineers were around :eusa_think:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pedro still got by him in the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So they did make a mistake... How on Earth did that happen? This was not Ferrari's first wet race and numerous Bridgestone engineers were around :eusa_think:

They haven't quite mastered the art of weather prediction..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ferrari would have presented Michael with the options i.e come in for dries, stay out and gamble etc. He made his choice, it was the wrong one, he lost out on a big opportunity to close the gap.

End of discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He made his choice, it was the wrong one, he lost out on a big opportunity to close the gap.

Exactly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0