Ban their floor? Wouldn't that make the drivers a bit vulnerable?
I guess one advantage they would have would be that if the mechanicals broke, or they ran out of fuel, they could finish the race Flintsone style ;)
Printable View
Ban their floor? Wouldn't that make the drivers a bit vulnerable?
I guess one advantage they would have would be that if the mechanicals broke, or they ran out of fuel, they could finish the race Flintsone style ;)
You might want to notice that it was McLaren, and implicitly RD, who couldn't make the mass-dampers work in their car and complained about it!Quote:
Originally Posted by savage86
But you may continue barking at Ferrari while not knowing the facts.
"Movable aerodynamic device"? They were just Kimi's feet:Quote:
Originally Posted by race aficionado
http://gauss.atmos.colostate.edu/~ro...te_florida.gif
http://www.speedtv.com/articles/auto/formulaone/36099/
Reading what it says on Speed, Ron doesn't actually mentions Ferrari or floors, so lets leave that for the press to make 2+2 = 12 :rolleyes:
Have you got a link?Quote:
Originally Posted by DimitraF1
I never heard Ron Dennis criticise BMW or Heifeld, he said that their strategy hindered Hamilton and Alonso (which it plainly did), but never did he criticise them for adopting said strategy.
the "facts" ? :D so now you're reaveling the facts for us , please be kidding :DQuote:
Originally Posted by ioan
as a fact of a matter in a Gazetta Dello Sport interview that Biatore gave at Bologna Motor Show you could read that Renault is a 100% convienced it must have been Ferrari behind the bann. When Bridgestones were fitted on Renault for the first time (in Barcelona that was) it all made sense for them as Bridgestone are just too wide to make the "advanced" version of mass dampers work at all.
mind you, Biatore might just be a tiny bit closer to Formula1 facts than say for instance a rabid rumanian ferrari fan. You're the guy who reads a Brawn interview where Brawn claims he didnt know about any closure in MS' contract (not like Brawn had anything to do with contracts) and you state it as a fact there wasnt any closures...give us a break :D (just for the record I dont think there was that type of closures in MS' contract either, MS was fast enough to beat team-mates. i just think you dont know jack**** about facts of that sort and I tend to go for Biatore's version)
My friend, first of all it's "romanian", cause the country it's called Romania, you know? And second, to me that sounds like an insult and a little bit racist, don't you think? We, the "rumanians", we'll be happy to accept your apologies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Heidfeldrulez
Mihaici, you might want to look up the use of words Rumania, rumanian as they are, ot atleast were common words, not just in English, but in many other languages. ;)
As expected, a thread with this title had to start tumbling down :rolleyes:
Oh dear :rolleyes: "New allegations". "Claims". "Possibly from McLaren" :eek: Not exactly a story full of facts is it :p : but one sure to go down a storm on a F1 forum :D
Of course, any team is entitled to question or protest another car if they feel rules may have been broken. If proven the FIA should take the appropriate action; if not the accusations linger like a bad smell. Such is the way of F1.
Ferrari and McLaren don't exactly have a healthy mutual admiration society. Just look at what went on 30yrs ago in the 1976 championship ;)