The Formula 1 Thread - 2014
Former Moderator
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,771
Likes: 311
From: Stanmore
However, looking at the facts rather than pure conjecture:
Australia - Retired on Lap 5 - engine problems started before the race began. Hamilton not at fault.
Canada - brake problems at the same time as Rosberg exacerbated by being too close behind Rosberg making overheating worse - Hamilton partially at fault.
Great Britain - Rosberg gearbox failure. Rosberg not at fault, OR WAS HE????
Germany - Brake failure in qualifying due to bell housing failure. (see below for the full explanation) Hamilton not at fault.
Hungary - Fire in first session of qualifying on the first flying lap. Hamilton not at fault.
...specific interaction between the structure of the brake material in question and the brake mounting on the F1 W05 Hybrid was at the root of the failure.
“Countermeasures have already been applied to both the disc geometry and the mounting to ensure there can be no repeat of the failure.
“Countermeasures have already been applied to both the disc geometry and the mounting to ensure there can be no repeat of the failure.
For what it's worth, here's a 2013 season comparison
http://grandprixrank...versus-rosberg/
You'll note that Hamilton finished 18 of 19 races, and Rosberg 16.
Rosberg had reliability problems at Australia, China and Hungary. Hamilton's only DNF was a puncture in Japan.
Does that mean Rosberg was damaging the car with his driving style and Hamilton was not?
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 14,273
Likes: 2
From: Chester
Originally Posted by fluffyninja' timestamp='1410176220' post='23320740
Quite an interesting comment I heard from Trundle in the Sky commentry too.
Hamilton has a very fuel efficient style of driving and was using a lot less fuel than Rosberg. That despite the fact he is pretty much the most aggresive driver out there. Seems mostly down to he carrys huge amounts of speed through the apex relative to a lot of drivers
Interestingly enough part of the coverage mentioned that Monza is a low usage circuit for fuel despite very high average speeds
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 11,504
Likes: 241
From: Sunny Norf*ck
Yes, but the point is Monza has relatively few low speed corners so has less fuel-consuming acceleration. The road equivalent is cruising on motorways which gives the best consumption figures. GPs are, I believe, fixed distance races in effect (Monaco is shorter distance) so the fact that Monza only requires one pit stop confirms that, just because it is high speed, doesn't mean high fuel consumption.
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 813
Likes: 0
I find it fascinating that the general consensus is that Rosberg's mistakes were 100% legit and Jordan's question post race are being laughed out of the paddock.
I thought exactly the same.
Why was it that lots of drivers locked up into turn 1, yet Rosberg with the slightest puff of tyre smoke decided (twice) to give up on the corner and take the slower escape? In the first instance, bringing Hamilton 2 seconds closer and the second, giving up position.
Is it really that far fetched an idea that Rosberg was told to do something like this if we wants to continue to drive for the team? Let's face it, any of the top 10 drivers on the grid could jump in that Merc and win races. Particularly if Rosberg's 'mistakes' were genuine. If there were legit, it's a little embarrassing for him don't you think as everyone else managed to lock up, yet still make the corner and only lost a few tenths, rather than the 2 seconds (and race win) that he lost.
Can't wait for it all to come out in Rosberg's book in a few years
I thought exactly the same.
Why was it that lots of drivers locked up into turn 1, yet Rosberg with the slightest puff of tyre smoke decided (twice) to give up on the corner and take the slower escape? In the first instance, bringing Hamilton 2 seconds closer and the second, giving up position.
Is it really that far fetched an idea that Rosberg was told to do something like this if we wants to continue to drive for the team? Let's face it, any of the top 10 drivers on the grid could jump in that Merc and win races. Particularly if Rosberg's 'mistakes' were genuine. If there were legit, it's a little embarrassing for him don't you think as everyone else managed to lock up, yet still make the corner and only lost a few tenths, rather than the 2 seconds (and race win) that he lost.
Can't wait for it all to come out in Rosberg's book in a few years
What he did makes absolute logical sense as a genuine incident. Hamilton was charging him down, an overtake looked inevitable. There may have barely been a puff of tyre smoke because he backed out so early knowing it would be a cruise home to second, and who knows what may have happened to Hamilton during the remainder of the race that he could have been there to capitalise on.
There are so many other ways the team could have rigged it.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 14,273
Likes: 2
From: Chester
Originally Posted by fluffyninja' timestamp='1410206060' post='23321659
Interestingly enough part of the coverage mentioned that Monza is a low usage circuit for fuel despite very high average speeds
Former Moderator
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 24,771
Likes: 311
From: Stanmore
Originally Posted by fluffyninja' timestamp='1410206060' post='23321659
Interestingly enough part of the coverage mentioned that Monza is a low usage circuit for fuel despite very high average speeds
)