Formula 1 - 2009 Season

[Bludd]

34 minutes left of practice 1. Heidfeld (just went out) and Kubica have only been around 6 and 3 times respectively. Do they have problems or are they just being BMW and leaving everything to the last minute?

Edit: ATM Heidfeld is 6 seconds off the pace set by Hamilton.

 

[Davros]

6 seconds...
is he on foot ?

 

[Bludd]

They ended up over 2.3 seconds off the lead time set by Rubinho.

Edit:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75476
They both had brake problems in P1 and in P2, Kubica's engine went to pasture. Looks like BMW's crappy 2009 shows no sign of abating.

 

[infinity4]

So where's all the hype they made all last season about this season?
They clearly are not championship material whether because of double diffuser or not. Kubica should move somewhere else next season.

 

[Bludd]

So where's all the hype they made all last season about this season?
They clearly are not championship material whether because of double diffuser or not. Kubica should move somewhere else next season.

I've been saying this. BMW wasted 2008, they had a golden opportunity to win both championships. They stopped development of their car and they started early with the 2009 car. It has clearly failed.

Renault tried the same thing in 2007 because their car sucked, but their 2008 car wasn't much better. It only came alive at the end of the season, so this is BMWs only hope.

Brawn managed to get it right though. Honda 2008 abomination was very deserving of an abortion and after Super Aguri went belly-up, they together developed the 2009 car which is now not a Honda at all. Wonder how good the Brawn would have been with Honda power. They had, after all, been allowed to up the power of their engine just as Renault. Still, the Mercedes is probably the best engine in F1 at the moment, no matter what Ferrari says.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

And the merc engine being the best is based on? Not saying it isnt, just like to know as all I ever hear is that these days all engines are pretty much the same.

 

[Bludd]

And the merc engine being the best is based on? Not saying it isnt, just like to know as all I ever hear is that these days all engines are pretty much the same.

It's speculation, but Brawn and Force India have commented on how good their straight line speed is now. Brawn were used to Honda engines and Force India ran with Ferrari engines.

And I don't believe for a second the engines are equal. Last year showed that they weren't. The engine builders are allowed to make changes to their engines on reliability grounds or if the changes reduce cost. They have to apply to the FIA to get do to this, but as we saw last year, they manage to sneak in performance increases with the reliability and cost reduction. Renault was all goody two-shoes and didn't, thus their engine lagged behind. They were allowed to increase power by 50 bhp (or was it 15?) or something for this year, so while the engines are now in the same ballpark, they are not equal.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Team comments dont mean alot to me. If somebody helps you out, or you got a deal that basically gives you almost a whole rear end of a car like FI, than the last thing you are going to say is how the stuff you used to have before was better than what you got now.

I'll agree that its probably not the same but in the same ballpark. Though I think its probably very close. We've seen Merc, Toyota and Renault engines in front (can we count Ferrari?) so if you do a guesstimate on the lack of aero some teams have I think in pure engine power you are pretty close. I dont think it will be a big influance on winning or losing.

 

[Bludd]

Of course there is more to consider than pure horsepower. For instance at Monaco, performance at low revs is important. The teams call it driveability.

I still think the Merc is the best engine followed by Ferrari, but it is speculation and I'd love for someone to prove me wrong (please join the forum, Norbert Haug!).

 

[Davros]

Dc said the merc engine puts out more power at 18,000 revs than the honda engine did at 19,000 revs

 

[catisfit]

Dc said the merc engine puts out more power at 18,000 revs than the honda engine did at 19,000 revs

That wouldn't take much.

That's not being sarcastic BTW, the differentiation required to make that statement true is pretty small.

 

[Bludd]

Fisico says they are getting KERS for Germany.

http://www.formula1.com/news/interviews/2009/5/9381.html

 

[V3]

He's practicing for his next career

I can see his rig breaking down on him

 

[Bludd]

The Merc KERS seems to be pretty awesome, though.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Autosport captured an interesting shot at Monaco:

http://www.autosport.com/gallery/photo.php/id/129296

Presumably that units pictured is the KERS battery pack; perhaps there is a second at the other side of the car, on the othersidepod. But, the early comments were that Ferrari's location was under the fual tank which both compromised the tank capacity and also compromised the center of gravity when removed. It looks like the McLaren/Merc unit has better placement and possibly weight distribution potential as well (that part of the sidepod looks to be forward of where the fuel cell would be and main compromise cited with KERS is not being able to get enough weight distribution towards the front of the car). This could be why McLaren have used it at all races, because the compromise that the other teams have seen with KERS just isn't there with their system.

 

[catisfit]

Autosport captured an interesting shot at Monaco:

http://www.autosport.com/gallery/photo.php/id/129296

Presumably that units pictured is the KERS battery pack; perhaps there is a second at the other side of the car, on the othersidepod. But, the early comments were that Ferrari's location was under the fual tank which both compromised the tank capacity and also compromised the center of gravity when removed. It looks like the McLaren/Merc unit has better placement and possibly weight distribution potential as well (that part of the sidepod looks to be forward of where the fuel cell would be and main compromise cited with KERS is not being able to get enough weight distribution towards the front of the car). This could be why McLaren have used it at all races, because the compromise that the other teams have seen with KERS just isn't there with their system.

It looks to be behind the bottom of the circular Vodafone symbol, which is pretty much where the fuel tank is longitudinally (i.e. below and behind the driver). The only difference appears to be lateral positioning to avoid raising the CoG of the fuel, but at the expense of lateral moment of inertia.

Could be a reason why the McLaren is so stiff this year, and why they are chasing high speed aerodynamic downforce.

 

[catisfit]

Campos Meta 1 formally submits 2010 entry.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75501

 

[Bludd]

Norbert Haug and a guy from Mercedes High-performance Engines showed the KERS to Martin Brundle (or was it DC?) during the BBC build up to a qualifying session (can't remember which) and it looked very light and very small. Apparently it's not connected to the brakes but the engine.

 

[MfA]

The braking power from the KERS is probably small enough that it doesn't need to be differentiated.

PS. oops, I guess F1 doesn't even have differential braking any more period ... always hard to believe just how low tech they are nowadays. Without differential braking it doesn't make much sense to put the KERS near the brakes AFAICS.

 

[Bludd]

So all of the teams are threatening to leave now?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/8064314.stm