Mat Rempit
Jul 29 2008, 14:20
Originally posted by Nitropower
It might be just a routinary check, the fact is the FIA has sealed LH's engine to check it before the Hungarian GP. FYI. Conspiracy theories accepted 
Page 13.
http://www.fia.com/germanygp/documents/GER...Race_Report.pdf
Regulations
http://f1.racing-live.com/f1/img/regulations/2008tech_en.pdf
Did Ron Dennis steal Ferrari's design again?
Sébastien
Jul 29 2008, 14:23
Originally posted by Rinehart
Unless they're breaking the same rules everyone else is...
Just don't break the rules and they'll be fine, even Ron would have gotten that by now.
undersquare
Jul 29 2008, 14:39
Originally posted by Sébastien
Just don't break the rules and they'll be fine, even Ron would have gotten that by now.
I'd have thought even you would have realised the rules are not simple enough to just either "break" or not.
Give us some discussion about Ferrari's 300-micron valve seat change. Does that break the rules?
Originally posted by Anomnader
Mclaren do the engineering and aero and systems
Mercedes make the engines.
I can see were you getting at with such distinction.
Thankfully Mercedes showed a more loyal view towards Mclaren last season (and I honestly expect Mclaren to return the favour in case of some hypothetic engine irregularities).
Whatever, it won't be too bad... they can always have Lewis do like last year
to prevent the worst.
Anomnader
Jul 29 2008, 14:49
Originally posted by as65p
I can see were you getting at with such distinction.
Whatever you think of McLaren have you ever heard of Mercedes trying to twist the rules?
Originally posted by Jerome
McLaren did not cheat. They stole. Just like Toyota, several years ago.
Of course they cheated. If they had only stolen the information, you'd be right. But they applied the information, hence cheated.
Sébastien
Jul 29 2008, 15:03
Originally posted by Anomnader
Whatever you think of McLaren have you ever heard of Mercedes trying to twist the rules?
Well unless you consider bribing government officials in South America and Africa "twisting the rules" I would say no
Anomnader
Jul 29 2008, 15:07
Originally posted by HSJ
Of course they cheated. If they had only stolen the information, you'd be right. But they applied the information, hence cheated.
One they didn't steal anything
Two, I don't it was ever proven that they applied any information
anachronox
Jul 29 2008, 15:28
Originally posted by Anomnader
One they didn't steal anything
Two, I don't it was ever proven that they applied any information
Find out why Whitmarsh apologised back in December 2007!
They cheated, they apologised and both teams have moved on from that. Now its upto the fans to try and get over and accept they cheated.
Break!
Anomnader
Jul 29 2008, 15:33
Originally posted by anachronox
Find out why Whitmarsh apologised back in December 2007!
They cheated, they apologised and both teams have moved on from that. Now its upto the fans to try and get over and accept they cheated.
Break!
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64370
this? sorry, doesn't support your post.
Try reading it.
anachronox
Jul 29 2008, 15:37
Originally posted by Anomnader
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64370
this? sorry, doesn't support your post.
Try reading it.
May be you should try reading this
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/64374
Anomnader
Jul 29 2008, 15:40
theres a lot of only maybes, we believe and could have beings in that report.
Not again
anachronox
Jul 29 2008, 15:44
Originally posted by Anomnader
I don't see any evidence or proof in that report, only maybes, we believe and could have beings.
What evidence or proof do you find in Mclaren's letter to FIA?
This report suggests cheating after the inspection of the 2008 Mclaren car and then comes the apology from the Mclaren team!
Lets stop this spying row thing again. Have discussed enough and more for an year!
Anomnader
Jul 29 2008, 15:45
Originally posted by anachronox
What evidence or proof do you find in Mclaren's letter to FIA?
This report suggests cheating after the inspection of the 2008 Mclaren car and then comes the apology from the Mclaren team!
Lets stop this spying row thing again. Have discussed enough and more for an year!
I'll leave it here, but I read the letter, and its very well written, if you read it theres is no acceptence that mclaren spied on Ferrari
Originally posted by anachronox
Find out why Whitmarsh apologised back in December 2007!
They cheated, they apologised and both teams have moved on from that. Now its upto the fans to try and get over and accept they cheated.
Break!
Their only other recourse was to appeal... back to the same judge again, with the timetables being constantly moved back and impinging on the 2008 season. Appealing the decision to Max Mosley, or making a tactical apology, which would you choose?
Amazing to see Mosley repeatedly sticking the knife into McLaren in 2007 and, almost with the same movement, dismissing the case against Renault after only the most superficial of inquiries. It would have been suicide for McLaren to pursue the case further.
Ross Stonefeld
Jul 29 2008, 15:56
If you're going to talk about this stuff, at least do your research. The initial hearings into Renault and McLaren were handled in similar ways and had identical results. It was the second McLaren hearing that all went a bit crazy.
ex Rhodie racer
Jul 29 2008, 16:21
While MacLaren certainly seem to have passed Ferrari in terms of performance, I´m not so certain they have actually improved relative to the rest of the field. It´s more a case of Ferrari having lost their way, rather than Mac finding an extra boost. Looking at the last two races, as well as the tests in between, it appears lack of grip and balance are the cause of Ferrari´s problems, not lack of engine performance. I honestly can´t see Mercedes endangering their reputation by doing anything untoward, so I would be really suprised if the checks revealed anything. If I were Ron I would be welcoming the checks, so that, at the end of the year if they win the title, there won´t be any doubts as to it´s legitimacy
Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
If you're going to talk about this stuff, at least do your research. The initial hearings into Renault and McLaren were handled in similar ways and had identical results. It was the second McLaren hearing that all went a bit crazy.
Bullshit. If the McLaren hearing process proved inadequate, you don't follow exactly the same methodology again unless you're either (a) retarded, (b) happy-go-lucky, or © don't care to find out the truth. Even so the initial investigation into McLaren was much more rigorous than that conducted for Renault.
Ross Stonefeld
Jul 29 2008, 18:12
The allegations were slightly different too.
Mika Mika
Jul 29 2008, 18:20
I wander if Merc too the secret turbocharger off in time for the FIA inspection ;)
Originally posted by Jerome
That really hurt... 
LOL
Ant's eggs anyone? lol.
Jerome
Jul 29 2008, 20:41
I do not want to get in the Stepney Gate thing at all, but I would like it if we would use the word 'cheating' for teams that deliberately try to break the rules by using parts on their car that both in the spirit and to the letter of the rules, are illegal. The fancar of Brabham in 1978 was not a case of cheating, nor was the Lotus 88 in 1982. Despite the fact that both were banned by the FIA. The same applies for the Renault with massdampers or the Ferrari with the moveable floor. The FIA knew of both constructions, and changed its mind/rules. That doesn't make both teams were 'driving with illegal cars'.
ex Rhodie racer
Jul 29 2008, 20:47
Originally posted by Jerome
I do not want to get in the Stepney Gate thing at all, but I would like it if we would use the word 'cheating' for teams that deliberately try to break the rules by using parts on their car that both in the spirit and to the letter of the rules, are illegal. The fancar of Brabham in 1978 was not a case of cheating, nor was the Lotus 88 in 1982. Despite the fact that both were banned by the FIA. The same applies for the Renault with massdampers or the Ferrari with the moveable floor. The FIA knew of both constructions, and changed its mind/rules. That doesn't make both teams were 'driving with illegal cars'.
Very true. Good point well made.
wrighty
Jul 29 2008, 21:23
Originally posted by Jerome
I do not want to get in the Stepney Gate thing at all, but I would like it if we would use the word 'cheating' for teams that deliberately try to break the rules by using parts on their car that both in the spirit and to the letter of the rules, are illegal. The fancar of Brabham in 1978 was not a case of cheating, nor was the Lotus 88 in 1982. Despite the fact that both were banned by the FIA. The same applies for the Renault with massdampers or the Ferrari with the moveable floor. The FIA knew of both constructions, and changed its mind/rules. That doesn't make both teams were 'driving with illegal cars'.
there's no room left for innovation in f1....innovation isn't when the governing body tells you what's legal
Didn't Whitmarsh say recently that Mobil (ExxonMobil) improved their oil (used in the McLaren) and that affected (positively) the engine's power?
undersquare
Jul 29 2008, 21:44
Originally posted by mkay
Didn't Whitmarsh say recently that Mobil (ExxonMobil) improved their oil (used in the McLaren) and that affected (positively) the engine's power?
"Laptime in a Can" was the phrase
. Low viscosity, and possibly some other tricks like a higher specific heat.
Shell did something similar, a little while earlier. Possibly in combination with new pistons it was rumoured to be worth 25 bhp.
Anomnader
Jul 29 2008, 21:48
It'll be funny if they say the Mercedes modifications are against the new engine rulings but that Ferraris mods that resulted in more engine power are fine.
undersquare
Jul 29 2008, 22:05
Originally posted by Anomnader
it'll be funny if they say the Mercedes modifications are against the new engine rulings but Ferraris are mods for more engine power are fine.
With Max firmly back in power I'm not counting anything out. The prospect of Ron standing there receiving trophies will be eating at his black-hearted soul
They are also checking Lewis' shoes for LEAD !!!!
Oh no !!! He didn't just say that !!!
jonpollak
Jul 30 2008, 01:17
Overheard in a Chelsea basemant.
Ze swartza iz vinning too many races (WHACK)...Ve must SCHTOP zis (WHACK)
Ich had enough of him (WHACK) I need zum zort uf prevention method (WHACK)
Ve must have ze ARIAN vinning my meistershaft damnit.
Ach de lieber...I HAVE IT
Ve can find zumthing wrong mit his wagen...Let me call ze cronies schnel"
Ganz Shißße
Jp
Originally posted by jonpollak
Overheard in a Chelsea basemant.
Ze swartza iz vinning too many races (WHACK)...Ve must SCHTOP zis (WHACK)
Ich had enough of him (WHACK) I need zum zort uf prevention method (WHACK)
Ve must have ze ARIAN vinning my meistershaft damnit.
Ach de lieber...I HAVE IT
Ve can find zumthing wrong mit his wagen...Let me call ze cronies schnel"
Ganz Shißße
Jp
for the first 2 milliseconds this was very funny, than the joke grew old...
jonpollak
Jul 30 2008, 02:17
Milliseconds?...
So you only got to the "O" in overheard?
Geez...sorry to disappoint you.
Problem is...I fear it ain't a joke.
Jp
Melbourne Park
Jul 30 2008, 02:22
From Briatore's words, quoted earlier, that they had followed the engine rules and been left behind, there is something going on. I wonder if STR gets the same Ferrari engines as STR? Even if they do not, the STR has outperformed the RBR4 in practice - Webber commentated about how on long runs, the STR was quite a bit quicker. The RBR4 has of course the Renault power plant. And Alonso has blown some engines this year too - which IMO shows Renault must be desperate. Renault's chassis director also criticized the lack of power of the Renault plant, when asked a pointed question about lack of power, he agreed. The interviewer slipped his guard, but a power situation is effecting the Renault power plant this year. Maybe also with the other teams outside of MB and Ferrari?
pingu666
Jul 30 2008, 03:14
well in the past ferrari have said they get the same, quiet voices disagree...
but now theres no continous devlopment, there probably pretty close, ferrari would keep the "best" units for themselves... red bull is in the best position to know...
ViMaMo
Jul 30 2008, 04:57
Thats bad. Apart from 19k rpm limit, an engine freeze is bad for weak powerplants.
Gilles4Ever
Jul 30 2008, 06:32
Originally posted by Anomnader
It'll be funny if they say the Mercedes modifications are against the new engine rulings but that Ferraris mods that resulted in more engine power are fine.
The way I understand it any changes/modifications to the engines get requested first and cleared by the FIA. They dont go ahead make the changes and then tell the FIA. So if Merc have any changes and got permission for those changes they have nothing to worry about. If they have made changes without clearing it with the FIA (I doubt anyone would be that stupid) remember what happened to Toyota in the WRC.
Mika Mika
Jul 30 2008, 06:33
Being how's it's nearly the next race now I guess everything is okay, otherwise we'd of heard.
Jerome
Jul 30 2008, 07:45
Originally posted by Gilles4Ever
The way I understand it any changes/modifications to the engines get requested first and cleared by the FIA. They dont go ahead make the changes and then tell the FIA. So if Merc have any changes and got permission for those changes they have nothing to worry about. If they have made changes without clearing it with the FIA (I doubt anyone would be that stupid) remember what happened to Toyota in the WRC.
Sorry, but wasn't the rallycar of the Toyota equiped with an extra and illegal turbo? Ofcourse Toyota did not report THAT to the FIA, they knew they were cheating.
The problem with F1 is that in the recent past teams DID went to the FIA and asked: 'Is this okay?' The FIA, by persona of Charlie Whiting DID give the okay... and then three months or so later, the FIA would say: 'Wooops! Our mistake. It's banned!'
And ofcourse McLaren can't be disqualified in the last instance, but if the FIA banned their 'unfair advantage' their drop in performance afterwards (if any) would be just unfair in my book.
wrighty
Jul 30 2008, 07:48
Originally posted by Jerome
Sorry, but wasn't the rallycar of the Toyota equiped with an extra and illegal turbo? Ofcourse Toyota did not report THAT to the FIA, they knew they were cheating.
not quite, the Toyota turbo air inlet was made specifically so that an extra sleeve inside the air intake pipe could be released and allow air to bypass the inlet restrictor. It was a deliberate, designed-in cheat
Jerome
Jul 30 2008, 07:58
Originally posted by wrighty
not quite, the Toyota turbo air inlet was made specifically so that an extra sleeve inside the air intake pipe could be released and allow air to bypass the inlet restrictor. It was a deliberate, designed-in cheat
Thanx! I did not know these details.
ATM_Andy
Jul 30 2008, 08:04
FYI, Re Toyota Turbo,
undersquare
Jul 30 2008, 08:09
Originally posted by wrighty
not quite, the Toyota turbo air inlet was made specifically so that an extra sleeve inside the air intake pipe could be released and allow air to bypass the inlet restrictor. It was a deliberate, designed-in cheat
Very cunning, and yet stupid, they got an extra 50 bhp so it was really obvious! If they'd settled for 20 or something they could have got away with it.
Anyway nothing like that in prospect here. If there's an argument at all it will be about whether the mods that were allowed as reliability updates were in fact performance updates. As long as they treat all teams the same I won't mind. But we can't be confident of that can we? Just have to hope.
But Flav is talking bull I think, Renault have changed as much as anyone, I gather. Pistons at least. They just started with a weaker engine.
Flavio Briatore has expressed frustration with how some of Renault's Formula One rivals have handled the current so-called 'freeze' on engine development.
The Renault boss told Italy's La Gazzetta dello Sport on Tuesday that the French team conformed with both the spirit and the letter of the rules to halt costly development of the current 2.4 litre V8 engines for several years.
"We were done in," he said.
"Others took another course and are far ahead of us now," Briatore insisted.
It is not clear which teams Briatore is referring to, but earlier this year we reported that a leading outfit may have found a way to creep ahead in the horse power department by requesting changes to its engine on the grounds of improving reliability (ZooL - Ferrari).
"No-one complained about it," an unnamed engineer told the German magazine Auto Motor und Sport, "for fear that they might also genuinely need to do the modification."
It is interesting that Briatore's comments come just days after it emerged that the FIA is now to begin a process of randomly and thoroughly inspecting the manufacturers' 2008-specification engines.
Source: GMM
© CAPSIS International
Melbourne Park
Jul 30 2008, 23:29
Originally posted by wrighty
not quite, the Toyota turbo air inlet was made specifically so that an extra sleeve inside the air intake pipe could be released and allow air to bypass the inlet restrictor. It was a deliberate, designed-in cheat
just like Ferrari's front floor spring arrangement, which improved the aero of the F2008? Toyota argued that it complied with the rules as they were - just like Ferrari did with the F2008 floor springs (not to mention perhaps another team with the same concept that exploited the rule).
Toyota were sufficiently upset about the interpretation, that they stopped rallying.
I think motor sport developments are full of teams trying to exploit not only the written rules, but more particularly, they way things are physically measured. F1 has around 20 revisions in the rules per year - but one would be hard pressed to say that teams are cheating. Exploiting poor measurement and poorly written rules has been part of the game for some time IMO.
Fatgadget
Jul 30 2008, 23:33
Originally posted by mkay
Didn't Whitmarsh say recently that Mobil (ExxonMobil) improved their oil (used in the McLaren) and that affected (positively) the engine's power?
You got to be kidding me......Snake Oil ?
wrighty
Jul 31 2008, 07:56
Originally posted by Melbourne Park
just like Ferrari's front floor spring arrangement, which improved the aero of the F2008? Toyota argued that it complied with the rules as they were - just like Ferrari did with the F2008 floor springs (not to mention perhaps another team with the same concept that exploited the rule).
Toyota were sufficiently upset about the interpretation, that they stopped rallying.
I think motor sport developments are full of teams trying to exploit not only the written rules, but more particularly, they way things are physically measured. F1 has around 20 revisions in the rules per year - but one would be hard pressed to say that teams are cheating. Exploiting poor measurement and poorly written rules has been part of the game for some time IMO.
i'd respectfully suggest that if this isn't the case, unless you've got a decent explanation as to the shortcomings of the 'restricted inlet' principle. The diagram above clearly shows why the device was designed, which was to increase the capacity of the air intake through the restrictor (there is an article on the subject of the design and operation of the device linked below) i certainly don't remember much from Toyota when it all came out (I think one of the mechanics was observed releasing the lock clip and was challenged by someone at the scene) aside of a mitigating plea that the management were unaware of the modification and therefore couldn't be held responsible.
TTE did not claim the device was legal but was represented by lawyers who entered a plea in mitigation. Mosley went on to say that the points Toyota and their drivers, Juha Kankkunen, Didier Auriol and Armin Schwarz had gained in 1995 would simply be taken away but others would not move up to fill the gaps.
The team would also be banned from contesting the 1995 Network Q RAC Rally and the 1996 World Rally Championship......
According to Toyota the device had been devised at a "certain level" and the management knew nothing about it. The FIA dismissed this claim, saying that as a team they were responsible for all their actions.
.....TTE has announced that it is planning to appeal against the ban extending through 1996.
from
'Toyota's illegal turbocharger'
Boing 2
Jul 31 2008, 08:19
Originally posted by Sébastien
If they didn't break the rules they've nothing to worry about.
wrighty
Jul 31 2008, 08:27
Originally posted by Enkei
Engine given all clear 
excellent news
thank you.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.