Page 7 of 9

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 00:22 16 Jul 2020
by Andy_S
MickyD wrote: Ferrari's Mugello track to host Tuscan GP as new dates fixed in F1 calendar
The race at Mugello, a circuit owned by Ferrari that has never hosted F1, will be designated the Grand Prix of Tuscany and take place on 13 September forming a triple-header after Spa and Monza. The Russian Grand Prix at Sochi was also confirmed to take place on 27 September. F1 is hopeful that both events will be open to fans, making Mugello the first meeting not held behind closed doors in 2020. Tickets for the Russian GP have been advertised and the organisers have confirmed they intend to allow fans to attend.

Optimistic, I would have thought? And how will the drivers and so on stay in those bubbles that are currently working so well? Presumably the paddocks will stay closed to non-essential personnel but it's hard to imagine no "bleed" at all.


Whoa there! Hold up a second!

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm not) but Silverstone is forced to pay millions and millions of GBP to F1 in order to be able to stage an F1 Grand Prix. They are also required, by law, to hold an absolute myriad of safety certificates both for "civilian" Health and Safety reasons and also to meet the requirements as demanded by F1.

It will be interesting to find out exactly how much Ferrari is paying and exactly what safety certificates are held by them, for this circuit.

Or is this yet another sly backhander to the poncing horse? And people wonder why Ferrari is so disliked?

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 08:47 16 Jul 2020
by Herts_Green
Mugello does host the MotoGP Italian Grand Prix so presumably that do have the necessary infrastructure in place to hold major events.

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 09:56 16 Jul 2020
by MickyD
Argylegames wrote:
MickyD wrote: And what history have McLaren got under their belt as supercar makers compared to Ferrari? Like it or not, Ferrari fandom is inevitable.


I suggest you google McLaren supercars - oh hang on ...

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=mclaren+supercars+list

:greensmile:

I meant history in terms of the years they've been in existence and the glamour associated with them, not the number of models they've knocked out - usually variants on the same theme, in McLaren's case. I don't recall seeing too many pictures of people like Brigitte Bardot in an open-topped McLaren in Monaco in the 1960s, for instance. Not surprising - they weren't even founded until the 1980s! Ferrari have decades of heritage, both racing and glamour, over McLaren, and they always will.

That's not to be an apologist for them - dem's just da facts, and that's why you'll always get a lot more non-Italian Ferrari fans than non-English McLaren fans..

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 13:16 16 Jul 2020
by MickyD
Just to labour the point... Jaguar, on the other hand, did have that glamour and history, and IIRC Enzo Ferrari himself described the E-Type and the most beautiful car ever built - and of course it was arguably the cool car of the sixties.

If they'd been a top F1 team for decades, sporting gorgeous British Racing Green, I have no doubt that Jaguar would have just as many non-native fans as Ferrari have - which I'm guessing you'd find quite acceptable!

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 13:41 16 Jul 2020
by Argylegames
I could not care less about other people's possible attitude to Jaguar, I merely find it odd that so many British fans seem to like Ferrari and it seems to me that other foreign marques do not engender similar worship. Given my ancestry I suppose I should have the opposite attitude to the Prancing Horse.

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 09:33 28 Jul 2020
by Argylegames
Ferrari boss admits to structural weaknesses with the car and says they won't be competitive before 2022.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/53564603

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 14:56 02 Aug 2020
by Argyle Nutter
Well that proved exciting in the end. What a lucky Lucky boy Hamilton is.

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 17:18 02 Aug 2020
by GreenThing
Lucky boy indeed.

Next week they will be using softer tyres and the possibility of higher temperatures. I hope they don’t blame Pirelli, they did claim that the tyres will do 40 laps maximum. Maybe the teams should do more pit stops and push the tyres a bit harder rather than try to get away with a single stop and spend the whole race managing the tyres.

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 21:14 02 Aug 2020
by Clarke_B
Luckily for Hamilton, the pitlane at Silverstone has the slowest pit lane speed limit on the Grand Prix circuit otherwise Max would have had him at the end.

Getting a little bored of the risk adverse strategies by teams on raceday, just think if someone like LeClerc had switched to a two stop strategy earlier in the race then he would have probably won!

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 21:32 02 Aug 2020
by Argylegames
I have never understood why they:

1. only have one tyre manufacturer
2. allow tyres which won't last a full race.

Would you put a tyre on your car which would only get you half-way home from work?

Put a proper tyre on the car FFS!

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 08:55 03 Aug 2020
by MickyD
Argylegames wrote: I have never understood why they:

1. only have one tyre manufacturer
2. allow tyres which won't last a full race.

Would you put a tyre on your car which would only get you half-way home from work?

Put a proper tyre on the car FFS!

1. There always used to be at least two but Michelin were more or less frozen out by Bernie Ecclestone (off the top of my head I'd guess 10-15 years ago ago), no doubt for the usual dubious Bernie reasons involving large wads of cash, leaving Pirelli as the (rubber) sole suppliers. In fact, to justify his renewed sole-supplier decision a few years back I specifically remember him saying something on the lines of "If we had Michelin tyres back, every set would last till Christmas." Utter rubbish, of course - manufacturers can make any kind of tyre, to last as long or as briefly as F1 requires, just as Pirelli have been doing for years, and as the aggrieved Michelin pointed out at the time.

2. They easily could, of course; but the tyres, even the hard ones, are specifically designed not to last the entire race, because at least two different compounds must be used each race. It's one of those false jeopardies introduced to make the racing more exciting and unpredictable and to add another level of strategy. It wasn't so long ago that Bernie also suggested having random artificial "rain showers" on certain parts of the track, for the same reason - desperation, with audiences falling, to spice up otherwise processional races. (Likewise DRS, which we now all take for granted as part of the spectacle.)

In times of total dominance such as now, tyres are about the only factor that keeps things interesting. Imagine the Mercedes on a rock-solid set of tyres for the whole race - with no concerns about tyre management or degradation or pit stop strategy, they'd win every race by a lap or two. That's also why F1 introduced refuelling on and off over the years - again, strategy and false jeopardy to spice things up for the viewers.

I suppose we should at least be grateful that the drivers no longer have to worry about "fuel management" as well - the overly-stingy fuel allowance (with no refuelling allowed) really was counterproductive, what with drivers regularly being forced to lift off to conserve fuel, and thankfully F1 eventually recognised that. It was done with the best intentions - to drive the production of more fuel-efficient engines, which technology would end up in road cars, as so much F1 tech does; but that particular tweak certainly did not spice up the action.

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 09:22 03 Aug 2020
by Argylegames
If they really wanted to improve the racing they'd specify circuits with wider corners and restrict the width of the tyres to about 8". Go back to how things were in the old days. (Except for the fragility of the cars!)

There is a reason the better Grands Prix style can have three different leaders in one corner. The width of the vehicles!

Re: F1 2020

Posted: 10:56 09 Aug 2020
by Dan Ellard
If I see one more person on social media suggest that Ferrari are sabotaging Vettel's car to favour Leclerc, I think I will explode.

How do you explain then that Leclerc beat him LAST season, when they had no reason to favour him at all?! If anything, the race in Australia showed that they were favouring Vettel to start with.

A top rated comment on Ferrari's Instagram read: "No way is Vettel 7 tenths slower, they're doing something to his car". Funny, because last year at Silverstone Leclerc was 6 tenths quicker, again when they'd have no reason to favour him.

Why is everyone assuming it's a car problem?! Why is basically no one offering the simplest (and imo correct) answer: Leclerc is simply better than Vettel?!