Those dam kerbs !!

Kirk · 20 Apr 2005, 17:28 (Ref:1283185)

The image that almost immediately comes to mind when I think of Imola, is that of high kerbs and F1 machinery worth millions of dollars, jumping them. I find it most annoying and somehow it is undignified that drivers are forced to drive this way to get the best times. For the casual fan, I think it may be a turn off as well. Comments?

Marbot · 20 Apr 2005, 17:37 (Ref:1283192)

If the kerbs weren't there,they'd just straight-line everything.

Canberra>karter · 20 Apr 2005, 17:50 (Ref:1283197)

Casual fans love seeing F1 cars getting airborne, it adds to the on the edge feeling.

ralf fan · 20 Apr 2005, 17:58 (Ref:1283203)

A good mix of circuits is what we need....some with high kerbs other which are smoother...

Silk Cut Jaguar · 20 Apr 2005, 18:01 (Ref:1283206)

People have to remember the tracks aren't solely used by F1 cars either, the kerbs have to be big enough to stop GT's thundering over them aswell.

maximus · 20 Apr 2005, 18:22 (Ref:1283227)

actually as a devoted f1 fan I love it!! It conjures up images of the cars from the 70's bouncing around the track, tail out on every bend. It adds to the visual spectacle of the car constantly on the edge which IMO is what F1 is all about.

the_royksopp · 20 Apr 2005, 18:30 (Ref:1283235)

Slightly offtopic: I and a friend were just wondering, what's the correct spelling of the word curb/kerb? I seem to have learned long time ago that the correct spelling was indeed kerb, but every newssite seem to write curb? Is that just an anglofication of an unlogically spelled word, or is the correct spelling curb?

Kicking-back · 20 Apr 2005, 18:47 (Ref:1283254)

The correct spelling in English is kerb.

A lot of people wrongly pronounce it curb and this spell it wrongly - although I believe this may be the US spelling.

Marbot · 20 Apr 2005, 18:50 (Ref:1283257)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

The correct spelling in English is kerb.

A lot of people wrongly pronounce it curb and this spell it wrongly - although I believe this may be the US spelling.

"and this spell it wrongly" Nice going K-B.

GP Racer · 20 Apr 2005, 19:47 (Ref:1283291)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kicking-back

The correct spelling in English is kerb.

A lot of people wrongly pronounce it curb and this spell it wrongly - although I believe this may be the US spelling.

You mean us Yanks are wrong again!? Yes thats how we spell it, curb.

I also love to watch those million dollar machines run over those big curbs. It's just another way to show some driver skill ,and some manufacturer reliabilty to handle those kerbs, oops, I mean curbs...

djinvicta · 20 Apr 2005, 19:56 (Ref:1283297)

Kirk; you prefer the airdrome circuits instead? Flat wide and boring. This weekend these guys have to "drive" the cars on one of the oldest GP circuits filled with nostalgia and memories of race drivers now gone. Sunday as night falls the silence must be deafening..

Kempi · 20 Apr 2005, 20:11 (Ref:1283306)

Filled with nostalgia and memories of a racetrack first and foremost. And that is what is so bad about this Imola: after 94 the once brillant and exciting track was changed into a chicanefest. Granted, Tosa had to be changed, Ratzinger's crash proved that it was a fatal-accident-to-happen-corner.
I am not so sure about Tamburello, though. I feel that if they had moved in the wall to border right next to the track, it would have been like in an oval: cars going into the wall would have had a very small angle and the energy would have been scrubbed off.

Well, anyways, Imola is just a track that is not suited for modern F1 or any racing with cars above say 230km/h. The short straights just deny any chance of overtaking and chicanes are always a sign of bad track design.

Kicking-back · 20 Apr 2005, 20:34 (Ref:1283323)

Imola is more of a driving challenge now than before the 95 changes.

Sodemo · 20 Apr 2005, 22:32 (Ref:1283408)

The kerbs are largely a symptom of the chicanes which sprouted post 1994.

There was a rumour of Imola returning to some of its 1994 glory about 2 years ago, in which they were going to reprofile Tamburello into a flat left hander once again, and make Villenueve more of an overtaking opportunity, before a squirt into Tosa. They were also going to make Rivazza the final turn, and completely bypass the Bassa chicane, but like most things that would be good for F1 this idea was quickly scrapped im sure...

Thats true KB, Imola is now more of a challenging track that it was pre 1994, but that doesn't mean its going to produce good racing, which it never does.
Even touring car racing is dull from Imola.

Pitstop · 20 Apr 2005, 23:29 (Ref:1283441)

Quote:

Originally Posted by GP Racer

You mean us Yanks are wrong again!? Yes thats how we spell it, curb.

I also love to watch those million dollar machines run over those big curbs. It's just another way to show some driver skill ,and some manufacturer reliabilty to handle those kerbs, oops, I mean curbs...

Darling boy - you say tomayto and I say tomarto!

Let's curb this nonsense! (I love you really).

BootsOntheSide · 21 Apr 2005, 09:22 (Ref:1283654)

The kerbsd add to the challenge for the drivers, and the image of the cars leraving the ground as they go across them is spectacular, and I'd've said it attracts casual viewers. As far as reliability is concerned I think Imola has had some of the highest finishing rates in recent years considering that it's always held earlier in the season.

I think it's a shame the circuit was changed so much after 1994, as a knee-jerk reaction. Both Ratzenberger and Senn'a crashes were caused my mechanical failures and could've happened anywhere - the same goes for virtually every serious crash since.

Sodemo · 21 Apr 2005, 09:39 (Ref:1283670)

There was no reason why Tamburello couldn't have been brought further into the circuit, like Curve Grande at Monza when it was reprofiled in 1995.
The run off couldn't have been extended due to the river that runs outside the track right by Tamburello.

Glen · 21 Apr 2005, 09:50 (Ref:1283681)

I like the variety - it is a proper challenge for engineers and drivers to absolutely batter the kerbs lap after lap. It does require nerve, fitness and precision on the part of the driver, so that's cool with me.

**chunterer** · 21 Apr 2005, 10:25 (Ref:1283709)

No disrespect to Roland, but i thought that Vwith Tamburello being altered, and speed being scrbbed off, Tosa could have been left as it was because the terminal speed would have een less?

Anyway, i like imola because of the flow, but i'm agreed with everyone else so far, it doesn't hack it as a 'racing' circuit anymore.

As for the kerbs, yes spectacle of cars 'yumping' (sorry for rallying slang) is good but it would be easy to stop it, either make them higehr or reprofile the corners again!

Glen · 21 Apr 2005, 10:55 (Ref:1283737)

Imola is a classic "car" circuit, where it is relatively difficult for the driver to make a difference - or rather the size of the difference will be smaller. One often sees a grid with pairs of cars for this reason. Very hard to overtake also.

As well as the kerb thing, the circuit has a lot of braking and acceleration - so a strong engine with good traction and good braking stability are essential. Williams territory. I hope!

**chunterer** · 21 Apr 2005, 11:01 (Ref:1283741)

Could be...

The overtaking thing is a double whammy this year....the cars are less efficient in this area and if the circuit doesn't assist with passing moves either then the race could be the bore of the season!

Glen · 21 Apr 2005, 11:13 (Ref:1283750)

Tyres have been ordered even softer and more marginal for this race - which could mean that defending one's position is more risky, for fear of damaging tyres. On balance I think the new regs might just improve the racing spectacle, but there is no getting around the fact that the circuit layout is far from the best.

WebberForWDC · 21 Apr 2005, 15:06 (Ref:1283894)

I mean they are saw-tooth kerbs? so boring... But I see no reason why F1 cars jumping kerbs is undinified??? Flaty, it's better the car has to behave well when it's not sitting flat and some teams might float over particulary high ones that they don't have in F1, while other teams' cars might pitch off into the fence when the driver pushes too hard... all part of the challenge and spectacle.

That said, in my opinion cars that have soft suspension and soak the road up a lot and pound over kerbs are more interesting to watch, than say F3s which look like they're on rails and sit flat through virtually any corner they go through.

Glen · 21 Apr 2005, 15:41 (Ref:1283913)

Suspension that is soft enough to float over massive curbs doesn't have to ride soft - and actually doesn't... Because they can tune the fast and slow compression response it is possible to have the wheels move quite a few inches when presented with a sharp bump but at the same time be virtually solid when subjected to roll or braking forces.

**Born Racer** · 21 Apr 2005, 18:38 (Ref:1284016)

I think it looks quite horrible at times seeing them banging over the kerbs.

What were kerbs implemented for in the first place? I thought it was to define the edge of the track, but now they've become a part of the track rendering them pointless in a way.

In karting, the best kerbs I've always confronted are ones that slow you down, therefore no benefit for running over them.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Brands Hatch Kerbs	McKay	Trackside	24	14 Aug 2004 17:24
Rockinghams Kerbs	Cynic	National & Club Racing	57	12 Nov 2003 16:19