2007 Season Predictions

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Bah. You've been given enough examples. You simply do not believe in mechanical sympathy. A bit depressing that someone who is an F1 fan rejects such a basic concept of motor racing, but carry on.

i do accept that pushing the car and the engine will increase the chance of a failure, that much is obvious, but my point is an F1 car should be able to be pushed to its limit for 2 race weekends without breaking. Kimi drives hard, just as any other driver does, and his machinery should be able to be pushed hard too. What are your comments on the fact that of Raikkonen's 6 years in F1, it was only 2005 that he had all these failures? Surely if your theory was correct, kimi would have poor reliability a lot more often and in various seasons?

Its strange that alonso frequently gets credit (from journalists) about the fact that he can drive on the limit for a whole race distance, and yet it appears that doing so is actually a bad thing because it might break your car. I just personally believe that a racer should be able to drive on the limit and the machinery to last the distance, no matter how hard its pushed. A racing driver should not be criticised for pushing too hard (unless he falls off the track of course), I actually admire that in a driver. I dont actually believe alonso accepts settling for second and races 'intelligently', that just sounds like an excuse for him getting beaten fair and square and not having the speed on the day to win

[Player(1) 0]

i do accept that pushing the car and the engine will increase the chance of a failure, that much is obvious, but my point is an F1 car should be able to be pushed to its limit for 2 race weekends without breaking. Kimi drives hard, just as any other driver does, and his machinery should be able to be pushed hard too. What are your comments on the fact that of Raikkonen's 6 years in F1, it was only 2005 that he had all these failures? Surely if your theory was correct, kimi would have poor reliability a lot more often and in various seasons?

Its strange that alonso frequently gets credit (from journalists) about the fact that he can drive on the limit for a whole race distance, and yet it appears that doing so is actually a bad thing because it might break your car. I just personally believe that a racer should be able to drive on the limit and the machinery to last the distance, no matter how hard its pushed. A racing driver should not be criticised for pushing too hard (unless he falls off the track of course), I actually admire that in a driver. I dont actually believe alonso accepts settling for second and races 'intelligently', that just sounds like an excuse for him getting beaten fair and square and not having the speed on the day to win

Answered your own question there, Alonso drivers to the car's maximium, Kimi pushes it futher till it cant take it anymore. Limit is not when it goes boom its when it goes fastest without going boom.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Answered your own question there, Alonso drivers to the car's maximium, Kimi pushes it futher till it cant take it anymore. Limit is not when it goes boom its when it goes fastest without going boom.

you are talking poo plops

[Jem of the Shire 0]

and what do u say to the question i asked just above the bit that you highlighted?

[monza gorilla 1]

Limit is not when it goes boom its when it goes fastest without going boom.

Yes.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

So drivers should deliberately drive within their own ability to save the car from breaking? What about all those times Schuey has banged in super-fast laps during a race and then gained positions during pit stops, should he have slowed down a bit to think of the engine??

[raikkonen_dominates2 0]

Answered your own question there, Alonso drivers to the car's maximium, Kimi pushes it futher till it cant take it anymore. Limit is not when it goes boom its when it goes fastest without going boom.

You mean they don't have any protection systems in Mclaren? Maybe they should copy it from my Volvo...

[monza gorilla 1]

Once upon a time, in a land far, far, away (Norfolk) a man called Colin built racing cars, and they were very fast. But they were very fragile and if Colin's drivers were too rough with their shiny racing cars they would break long before the finish of the race and make Colin sad. But if the drivers were smooth and gentle with their cars they would last the distance and because of their speed they would win. Colin had a driver called Jim who could do this.

Many years later a mechanic called Ron also built cars and he had a driver called Alain who could drive like Jim and so they won many races and Ron was happy.

So we see that if a man makes a fragile car that is very fast then his drivers need to understand that it is not wise to mullah the crap out of them but to coax them with smoothness and guile, and the car will respond to this, and the prize shall be theirs, and they shall live happily ever after.

The End.

*may be complete fabrication*

[Autumnpuma 0]

So drivers should deliberately drive within their own ability to save the car from breaking? What about all those times Schuey has banged in super-fast laps during a race and then gained positions during pit stops, should he have slowed down a bit to think of the engine??

Okay Jems, here's a question for you:

Who gets more points towards the WDC?

a ) A driver who drives slower to keep his car from breaking, thereby landing a 3rd-place podium.

b ) A driver who drives at the uttermost limits of his speed, breaking the fragile car and a DNF.

Well?

EDIT: damned 'b )' without the space pulled up the 'cool' smiley...erg.

[alonsenna 0]

i do accept that pushing the car and the engine will increase the chance of a failure, that much is obvious, but my point is an F1 car should be able to be pushed to its limit for 2 race weekends without breaking. Kimi drives hard, just as any other driver does, and his machinery should be able to be pushed hard too. What are your comments on the fact that of Raikkonen's 6 years in F1, it was only 2005 that he had all these failures? Surely if your theory was correct, kimi would have poor reliability a lot more often and in various seasons?

Well 2005 wasn't his worse year regarding those failures since he only had 3 DNF's and one of them was at the US because of the famous Michelin tyres incident.

If we take a look at KR's DNF's due to engine failures we would find that:

-2001: 2 vs 1 (Heidfeld)

-2002: 6 vs 1 (Coulthard)

-2003: 1 vs 0 (Coulthard)

-2004: 4 vs 1 (Coulthard)

I think any mathematician would say those results are statistically significant...

[Autumnpuma 0]

My point was never that he had ONLY engine failures or that ALL the engine failures were Kimi's fault. Is everyone deliberately missing my point?

Kimi has thrown away alot of valuable points by pushing for speed when he aught to be nursing his fragile car home. Hell, is there anyone on this planet that thinks the McLaren is anything BUT a fragile car? How much brains does it require for a driver to reign himself in and nurse the damned car home in the points? Apparently more brains that Kimi's got. Even one lousy point is worth far more than a DNF from the lead, isn't it? At the end of the year, tell me how much that fast lap right before the DNF is worth? To some, it's worth being called the 'moral champion', to other, more realistic, people it's called being a loser one more time.

Yeah, McLaren SHOULD build a better car, I hear you there, Jem, but when you know the car can't take abuse, DONT PUSH IT. Seems a damned simple concept to me.

If being fast equated to winning the World Championship, Kimi would have won by now. Unfortunately for Kimi, you have to think as well as drive in order to wear that particular crown. I was a Kimi fan initially. After seeing his stupidity behind the wheel, I've grown steadily more disgusted with him. Now for 2007 he's going to be in the most dependable car the sport has got and lets see if he can finally pull a championship out of his arse, because it's clear to me that's where all his thinking is going on!!

EDIT: Alonsenna: Fantastic bit of research there. It DOES paint a very convincing picture.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

My point was never that he had ONLY engine failures or that ALL the engine failures were Kimi's fault. Is everyone deliberately missing my point?

Kimi has thrown away alot of valuable points by pushing for speed when he aught to be nursing his fragile car home. Hell, is there anyone on this planet that thinks the McLaren is anything BUT a fragile car? How much brains does it require for a driver to reign himself in and nurse the damned car home in the points? Apparently more brains that Kimi's got. Even one lousy point is worth far more than a DNF from the lead, isn't it? At the end of the year, tell me how much that fast lap right before the DNF is worth? To some, it's worth being called the 'moral champion', to other, more realistic, people it's called being a loser one more time.

Yeah, McLaren SHOULD build a better car, I hear you there, Jem, but when you know the car can't take abuse, DONT PUSH IT. Seems a damned simple concept to me.

If being fast equated to winning the World Championship, Kimi would have won by now. Unfortunately for Kimi, you have to think as well as drive in order to wear that particular crown. I was a Kimi fan initially. After seeing his stupidity behind the wheel, I've grown steadily more disgusted with him. Now for 2007 he's going to be in the most dependable car the sport has got and lets see if he can finally pull a championship out of his arse, because it's clear to me that's where all his thinking is going on!!

EDIT: Alonsenna: Fantastic bit of research there. It DOES paint a very convincing picture.

Mike, we heared you, now get what we're saying. Kimi drives his car to the absolute limit, he is a purebred racer. There is a racer and a RACER. The car is suppose to last. Thats why the F1racing mag that you bought with the article called "looking back in anger" squarely blames Mclaren for ALL his DNF's. It does not matter if it's the flippin last lap. It's got nothing to do with it. Alonso did 12 flippin fastest laps in China 2006 at the end with his engine 2 races old. How many times is Kimi suppose to nurse his car home. You base this statement on one particular incident, when it was a team decision. Note Spain 2005. He raced away, build a 25 second lead, nursed the car home. I see alot of this happening with Ferrari with the car being fast and reliable.

"Yeah, McLaren SHOULD build a better car, I hear you there, Jem, but when you know the car can't take abuse, DONT PUSH IT." <--------Whose fault is it, whose fault was it in 2006....you said the answer yourself. You can't tell a racer don't push it. How many times must I say Kimi drives his car perfectly.....

If you can find one quote from any team principal. mechanic or engineer about Kimi breaking engines, maybe I'll start believing it. But you know what....YOU GOT NOTHING from any of them TO PROVE THIS THEORY!

[Jem of the Shire 0]

i dont personally think alonso deliberately drives slower than he knows is possible to 'nurse the car', i just think the renault was more reliable than the mclaren in 2005! We shall agree to disagree but hopefully next year kimi will show in a ferrari that for 2 years in a row he cannot be called a 'carbreaker' cos he didnt have many problems in 06 with the car, just lack of speed

[monza gorilla 1]

Okay Jems, here's a question for you:

Who gets more points towards the WDC?

a ) A driver who drives slower to keep his car from breaking, thereby landing a 3rd-place podium.

b ) A driver who drives at the uttermost limits of his speed, breaking the fragile car and a DNF.

Well?

EDIT: damned 'b )' without the space pulled up the 'cool' smiley...erg.

Ha! At last we diverge! It's not about driving slower, it's about driving smoother, which of course can actually be faster. But I suppose that's what you meant anyway.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

so kimi needs to change his driving style? Alonso is far from smooth, many drivers dont appear to drive smoothly, that hasnt affected their car in the past (massa, schuey etc)

[ykickamoocow 0]

so kimi needs to change his driving style? Alonso is far from smooth, many drivers dont appear to drive smoothly, that hasnt affected their car in the past (massa, schuey etc)

Is it just me who thinks that a F1 team should design a car for the roughest of drivers.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Is it just me who thinks that a F1 team should design a car for the roughest of drivers.

no, i think that too, an f1 car should be able to be pushed as hard as possible (to get maximum speed) and not break

[monza gorilla 1]

Put a smooth, fast driver into the car. Then put an aggressive (rough, in Ykick's words), fast driver into an identical car. Send them out onto the track. Which one will break first?

[ykickamoocow 0]

Put a smooth, fast driver into the car. Then put an aggressive (rough, in Ykick's words), fast driver into an identical car. Send them out onto the track. Which one will break first?

A modern F1 car should not break as a result of aggressive driving.

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Put a smooth, fast driver into the car. Then put an aggressive (rough, in Ykick's words), fast driver into an identical car. Send them out onto the track. Which one will break first?

Yes BUT MG, Kimi is THE smooth driver, he thinks in straight lines and drives in straight lines. He drives corners in small effective movements.....

The more this debate goes on the more I think the car-breaking theory is baloney!

[monza gorilla 1]

Yes, Brad, I know, but it is an interesting topic don't you think? As it happens, I'm not convinced by either side yet, but the theory should hold true to some degree. As for building the cars to withstand the roughest treatment a driver can mete out, why not just buy a fleet of Imprezas and go rallying? You make a stronger car, you make a heavier car. You make a heavier car you limit your set up options with respect to your ballast positions, you compromise your performance in order to cope with a driving style. That's not how it should be. Not to me at least.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

Put a smooth, fast driver into the car. Then put an aggressive (rough, in Ykick's words), fast driver into an identical car. Send them out onto the track. Which one will break first?

obviously the harder a car is pushed, the more chance it will break, but thats not the issue - a racing driver should not be criticised for driving too fast!!! And a formula 1 racing car, the pinnacle of motorsport technology, should be able to withstand the pressures of being pushed to its limit. There is no evidence at all that alonso deliberately drives slower than he could do cos he thinks of the car. All drivers obviously slow down and nurse the car when they've got the win in the bag, or near the end of the race, but I'm sure they all drive as fast as they possibly can until they get to that point

[monza gorilla 1]

It's not about fast and slow, Jem.

[Jem of the Shire 0]

It's not about fast and slow, Jem.

It is, because people have been using examples of him posting fast laps etc, not talking about his driving style. Agressive racers in the past havent had this problem (Schumacher thrashed the hell out of his ferrari's and seemed to be ok)

[Player(1) 0]

Flat spotting his tyre is the best example I think. It didnt need to happen, it was because of his driving style and he was leading so thats the most points you can stupidly throw away when you on on the home stretch in the fastest car on the grid. Jem want to jump in and say McLaren should have made it so the tyres cant be flat spotted?

Kimi simply wont survive a season long close battle with any other driver, especially if its Alonso or Schumacher who can actually think on their feet.