|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
18 Nov 2006, 10:02 (Ref:1769035) | #26 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,405
|
Quote:
Running without ballast can't have done any harm either... |
||
|
18 Nov 2006, 13:57 (Ref:1769124) | #27 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 134
|
Quote:
Was/is there a difference between FIA and ACO spec? |
||
__________________
We are the ones that want to choose, always want to play, never want to lose. - |
18 Nov 2006, 18:42 (Ref:1769204) | #28 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 7,618
|
Ballast at Dubai..
Car Weight 1 70+25 Kg 2 80+25 Kg 3 40 Kg 4 50 Kg 9 +45 Kg 23 20 Kg 55 10 Kg 56 20 Kg 58 35+28 Kg 59 20+28 Kg 63 45 Kg 75 +28 Kg 77 20 Kg 79 20+28 Kg 80 20+28 Kg 82 35 Kg 99 20 Kg the Ferrari is the #3 |
||
__________________
Apocalypse becomes creation / Gor-Gor shall erase the nation Before you leap into his gizzard / Fall and worship Tyrant lizard Ciao Marco |
18 Nov 2006, 19:27 (Ref:1769218) | #29 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 712
|
The F550 run with 50 (40 + 10 kgs setted in the night) kg of ballast and for FIA decision started behind the GT1 cars, and have several problem.
Anyway, the car got the 4th best lap at 3 Tenths from the fastest lap, and the drivers was not champions like Lamy (last year) I think it is difficulty for FIA/ACO/FFSA accept the car in this configuration, I hope, I dream, but a F550 faster then a DBR9 should be a no-good thing for the Prodrive business. We need time to understand the situation, and the future of the programs for tha Care Racing |
||
|
18 Nov 2006, 20:17 (Ref:1769232) | #30 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,418
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
"When the fear of death out weighs the thrill of speed, brake." LG |
18 Nov 2006, 23:46 (Ref:1769323) | #31 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,919
|
The car basically ran to its own rules as a test bed, scoring no points. This was allowed by FIA to see the performance and advantages of a electronic control module as a restriction device! As the car was ran,it sounds like it met no sactioning body's rules. Testing only!
L.P. |
||
|
18 Nov 2006, 23:56 (Ref:1769329) | #32 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 5,405
|
Quote:
However, it should be noted that our car has no ballast, which gave it some advantage. But it should be remembered that last year we had an excellent set-up for the car, which we have not forgotten. Was there some controversy over the 550's performance? |
||
|
19 Nov 2006, 13:57 (Ref:1769648) | #33 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,710
|
Maybe they better gone there with 2 550's, one with the old, restricted engine and one with the new one
|
||
|
20 Nov 2006, 11:37 (Ref:1770532) | #34 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 555
|
On Fridy evening the GT Bureau add an additional ballast of 10kg to the F550. Then there was a request of all the GT1 teams (again initiated by Vitaphone) that there are some championship decisions are open and that the Larbre F550 must start begind all the other GT1 cars. That request was rejected.
But after the warm-up lap Gabriele Gardel droves through the pitlane instead of the start finish straight. |
||
|
20 Nov 2006, 13:13 (Ref:1770616) | #35 | |
Racer
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 200
|
The Ferrari only carried a ballast of 10 KG, not 50. The GT Bureau changed the class from GT1 to G2 and the originally added ballast of 40 KG was deleted. After the shown performance in qualifying they added 10 KG.
|
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
10-10th's 2004 Fantasy Challenge FIA GT ROUND 10 DUBAI PREDICTIONS (+ results) | 19dodge | Predictions Competitions | 6 | 8 Oct 2004 18:59 |
ALMS Rnd 1: 12 Hours of Sebring 16-18 Mar 2000 | marcus | North American Racing | 2 | 20 Mar 2000 20:34 |