|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
18 Jun 2004, 02:20 (Ref:1007508) | #1 | ||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,281
|
Reliability after Canada
Renault had a bad day, McLaren and Jordan got two cars in the finish line.
Code:
Ferrari 100% 0 Toyota 94% 1 Williams 88% 2 Sauber 88% 2 Renault 88% 2 Jaguar 75% 4 BAR 75% 4 Minardi 63% 6 McLaren 56% 7 Jordan 56% 7 --------------- General 78% 35 Everyone is doing a good job this year, except Minardi, McLaren and Jordan, but, of course, Minardi and Jordan have last year's engines, thus all the finger point to Mac. Disqualifys by rules are not counted as unreliability, then Williams and Toyota have had a perfect record this round. |
||
|
18 Jun 2004, 12:43 (Ref:1007842) | #2 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 13,000
|
Firstly, this belongs in the F1 forum, not the bikes.
Secondly, to have a reliable car, you ahve to build one that can complete the race distance legitimately and be in the hunt for poitns after 190-odd miles, so the Toyotas and Williams have to count as unreliability. Thirdly, surely the reliability stats don't look qutie so bad for Mclaren, because they're having to develop new machinery, rather than using tried-and-trusted stuff? Nice set of stats all the same. |
||
|
18 Jun 2004, 19:37 (Ref:1008205) | #3 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,332
|
Tried and trusted in a season where they didn't have to run one engine all weekend long?
|
||
__________________
Juliette Bravo! Juliette Bravo!!!! |
18 Jun 2004, 20:32 (Ref:1008265) | #4 | |||
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 110
|
Re: Reliability after Canada
Quote:
|
|||
|
18 Jun 2004, 20:35 (Ref:1008267) | #5 | |
Registered User
Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 16,661
|
Dave Breen is right.
|
|
|
19 Jun 2004, 02:28 (Ref:1008421) | #6 | ||
Subscriber
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,281
|
Boots:
No, Will and Toy DNQs definitively don't have to count as unreliability problems. As maximum, it could be considered as race not done, but in this case I don't think so. The cars were reliable, although they were illegal, I don't want to mix different things. Another thing is the question when a driver has an incident and leave the race in the first lap or so. Even in this case, again it doesn't count as unreliable, but as race not done, and then the denominator to calculate percentages must be changed. But I don't make currently that kind of correction. About Mac, yes, they are playing with new parts, but... precisely it shows how bad they have done when they have to do it in the middle of the season |
||
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is reliability in F1 a bad thing? | DougK | Formula One | 19 | 11 Nov 2004 19:43 |
Mclaren: Reliability | perminder | Formula One | 17 | 11 Nov 2004 19:36 |
Reliability after Imola | Schummy | Formula One | 10 | 30 Apr 2004 15:37 |
F1 Reliability | Wrex | Formula One | 23 | 11 Aug 2003 07:46 |
So much for F2001's reliability....LOL | BBKing | Formula One | 10 | 3 Apr 2002 14:51 |