|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
8 Nov 2017, 05:28 (Ref:3779392) | #2401 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,525
|
|||
__________________
ยินดีที่ได้รู้จัก |
8 Nov 2017, 07:11 (Ref:3779401) | #2402 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,725
|
|||
__________________
Geting old is mandatory, acting old is optional. |
8 Nov 2017, 07:27 (Ref:3779403) | #2403 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,551
|
Quote:
The problem with the sabres on wheels option is that we would be back to a procession. Nobody except Max would risk overtaking for fear of damage and the result would be decided on the Saturday when Mercedes' horses were given a boost! |
|||
|
8 Nov 2017, 08:43 (Ref:3779413) | #2404 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 8,088
|
||
|
9 Nov 2017, 21:22 (Ref:3779684) | #2405 | ||
Rookie
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 54
|
My thoughts on likely engine regs, no one will be happy, but no one ****ed off enough to leave:
1. Fuel Flow curve: Change fuel flow to increase proportional to engine speed, so 100kg/hr @ 10500rpm (same as now) then for every extra 1000rpm you increase speed the fuel limit increases by 5kg/hr (for sake of argument), so 105kg/hr @ 11500rpm, 110kg/hr @ 12500 rpm... etc. to 125kg/hr @ 15500rpm. So performance is still kept in check by fuel flow, efficiency is encouraged, but the engine is allowed to rev more naturally & hence a bit more noise. 2. MGU-H: Currently the MGU-H power is unlimited, so they push this system to the max, so much they they hardly ever need to use the wastegate (so less noise). Seeing as the manufacturers want to keep their MGU-K then why not limit its power, I suggest that the total energy per lap from MGU-K plus MGU-H should be 2MJ (currently MGU-K alone is 2MJ) so the MGU-H will not be able to charge the battery all the time & they'll have to use the wastegate..... so more noise! 3. MGU-K: Remove the deployment power limit (currently 120kW) but keep the battery size the same (4MJ per lap) to stop it getting any heavier. limit the power that the system can deploy itself to 60kW, but then let the driver control the rest with the push to pass button.... as I said no max power limit to this but it all has to come from the 4MJ so if your motor can do 400kW that's fine but you can only have it for a few seconds, could be fun! Maybe they could mandate that each manufacture has to make their MGU-H unit available to any other or is that just silly? |
||
|
9 Nov 2017, 21:51 (Ref:3779691) | #2406 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,164
|
Quote:
1. Not sure what a graduated rate does for anyone. In the end, they will likely run in a narrow power band anyhow which will be whatever the potential maximum flow rate allows. So in your example... why would they run at lower flow rates? At lower RPM they might be at part throttle anyhow (meaning less that 100% flow rate anyhow). 2. The amount of MGU-H power you get in the end still comes from the burning of fuel. I don't know what the limits are today, but given a specific flow rate and an expected ICE efficiency value, that is going to be your cap on MGU-H. And I could be very wrong, but while there may be a current limit on how you use MGU-H, I think there is also some part of that energy that can be used, but not stored???? So I don't think tweaking MGU-H energy usages is going to somehow impact sound of the engines. Either way... it seems like MGU-H is destined to go away. It is complex and while the current manufactures have generally figured it out (minus Honda), it is likely VERY unattractive proposition for a new manufacture. 3. In general the proposed rules are already looking to rely more upon MGU-K (which I think you are doing as well). I "think" that also includes spec parts. Richard |
||
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
10 Nov 2017, 12:04 (Ref:3779770) | #2407 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,406
|
Sign of things to come?
Hugo Boss to leave F1 after almost 40 years in the sport. Off to Formula E. Last edited by F1Guy; 10 Nov 2017 at 12:11. |
||
__________________
When did I do dangerous driving??? |
10 Nov 2017, 12:56 (Ref:3779774) | #2408 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,551
|
|||
|
10 Nov 2017, 14:45 (Ref:3779784) | #2409 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,164
|
You got it all wrong... Real question... Who was the worse driver? Boss or Massa? And did he stay in F1 much too long? I for one always liked Hugo. Nice chap. I can't remember him putting a foot wrong during his racing career. His team uniforms in 1940's was a bit sketchy however.
Richard |
|
__________________
To paraphrase Mark Twain... "I'm sorry I wrote such a long post; I didn't have time to write a short one." |
10 Nov 2017, 15:00 (Ref:3779788) | #2410 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,551
|
|||
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me." |
10 Nov 2017, 15:32 (Ref:3779794) | #2411 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 18,750
|
Didn’t even notice Hugo Boss were in F1 anyway
|
|
__________________
He who dares wins! He who hesitates is lost! |
10 Nov 2017, 16:03 (Ref:3779804) | #2412 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,984
|
perhaps not directly a topic for future rules, but raises an interesting issue.
as long time sponsors like this leave for what presumably is a cheaper, better opportunity, the issue of a more equal distribution of prize money must be seen as problem which needs solving now rather than later. obviously the logic of equal distribution suggests the teams will become (perhaps) closer in performance, but beyond that does an equal distribution protect the sport in the event that there is a mass exit of existing or traditional sponsors...is it an effective hedge? declining viewership numbers are of course one problem leading to this but also if the new engine rules are perceived to be a technologically backwards looking move, is F1 in risk of losing more sponsors...sponsors who are increasingly more concerned with being associated with forward thinking brands/formulas? |
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
10 Nov 2017, 16:26 (Ref:3779808) | #2413 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,551
|
Quote:
I've not seen the story to see what their reason for departure is. |
|||
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me." |
10 Nov 2017, 16:46 (Ref:3779810) | #2414 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,984
|
yeah i was just speculating so haven't read anything specific either...but i dont think its unreasonable to assume that they see FE as a better sponsorship platform going forward. certainly i would think its a cheaper option as well.
|
||
__________________
Home, is where I want to be but I guess I'm already there I come home, she lifted up her wings guess that this must be the place |
10 Nov 2017, 16:52 (Ref:3779812) | #2415 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,551
|
It seems more like they are transferring their sponsorship of the same brand (Mercedes) into a different category. Not sure it is rules based in any way.
|
||
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me." |
10 Nov 2017, 17:05 (Ref:3779813) | #2416 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,944
|
Quote:
It would seem as though mass exposure from F1 is of less importance to them than their being associated with the lesser appeal of green technology. |
|||
|
10 Nov 2017, 17:12 (Ref:3779814) | #2417 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,278
|
Perhaps the rules went over their heads?
Or maybe the topic did... |
|
__________________
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes. When they realise you have, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes. |
12 Nov 2017, 14:41 (Ref:3780055) | #2418 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,787
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
12 Nov 2017, 22:02 (Ref:3780098) | #2419 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,164
|
|||
__________________
Brum brum |
12 Nov 2017, 22:39 (Ref:3780104) | #2420 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 23,787
|
|||
__________________
"If you're not winning you're not trying." Colin Chapman. |
14 Nov 2017, 04:10 (Ref:3780331) | #2421 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,164
|
They aren’t just sponsoring FE, it’s way more than that. They are the series’ “official apparel partner”.
https://www.autosport.com/fe/news/13...tieup-revealed /OT |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
14 Nov 2017, 07:07 (Ref:3780341) | #2422 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,406
|
You've never noticed this.... or this... or this... or as recently as this... Wow! I can understand why Hugo Boss are leaving considering die hard F1 fans don't even notice their involvement. I'm one of those that believe in supporting the companies that support my interests. Hugo Boss is a favourite. My accountant however, is not happy. Last edited by F1Guy; 14 Nov 2017 at 07:12. |
||
__________________
When did I do dangerous driving??? |
14 Nov 2017, 07:20 (Ref:3780342) | #2423 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,406
|
Is this the official reason then? Hugo Boss transferring their sponsorship of Mercedes into Formula E?? Seems like you are well informed. Could you provide a source?
|
||
__________________
When did I do dangerous driving??? |
14 Nov 2017, 10:04 (Ref:3780362) | #2424 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,551
|
Quote:
Quote:
When the original news was announced, reports stated at the time that Hugo Boss were 'following' Mercedes into FE. Since then, further details have been announced and can be found here. 'Hugo Boss is becoming the series' 'official apparel partner'. Its logos will appear on FE officials' clothing, the championship's demo car and trackside advertising.' With previous information about the transfer of Mercedes funding and following the brand into FE here. 'with FE's profile growing, and manufacturers including Mercedes joining up in the near future, Hugo Boss is moving its sponsorship efforts' |
||||
__________________
"When you’re just too socially awkward for real life, Ten-Tenths welcomes you with open arms. Everyone has me figured out, which makes it super easy for me." |
14 Nov 2017, 11:44 (Ref:3780371) | #2425 | ||||
Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,406
|
Right.. so Hugo Boss are transferring sponsorship to Formula E as a category (which is what I originally posted), and not just "transferring sponsorship to the same brand (Mercedes)" as you so confidently refuted with your post below.
Quote:
Quote:
I posted about a 40 year sponsorship in Formula 1 ending and transferring to FE because IMO, it has significance to the direction F1 is heading in. But the first post after mine was you with the following childish post... Maybe it had nothing to do with rule changes. Maybe it did. Was it a coincidence that Hugo Boss made this announcement not long after the future engine rules were released? Perhaps, perhaps not. That was the point for my post here - to open up the discussion. If you don't feel you can contribute to the discussion, then please save the immature comments and bullsh*t for your school friends. Have a nice day. |
||||
__________________
When did I do dangerous driving??? |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[Rules] Are more rule changes necessary ? | Marbot | Formula One | 51 | 27 Sep 2009 17:19 |
F1 future rule changes | TheNewBob | Formula One | 57 | 20 Dec 2006 09:19 |
Sensible ideas for future technical regs anyone?/Rule changes - more to come [merged] | AMT | Formula One | 74 | 12 Nov 2002 16:09 |
Future Tourer Future | Crash Test | Australasian Touring Cars. | 13 | 17 Jul 2002 23:01 |