Jump to content


Photo

Kimi's Ferrari 5kg over-weight?


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:27

Kimi's car weighed 662.5kg after qualifying, Button's weighed 660.0kg, which theoretically gives Kimi one lap extra, but Kimi pitted one lap before Button. So if Kimi really was low on fuel and had to stop, it gives the impression that Kimi's Ferrari is 5kg heavier than the 605kg minimum without fuel.

Advertisement

#2 ClubmanGT

ClubmanGT
  • Member

  • 1,270 posts
  • Joined: May 06

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:28

Originally posted by Madras
Kimi's car weighed 662.5kg after qualifying, Button's weighed 660.0kg, which theoretically gives Kimi one lap extra, but Kimi pitted one lap before Button. So if Kimi really was low on fuel and had to stop, it gives the impression that Kimi's Ferrari is 5kg heavier than the 605kg minimum without fuel.


It's the Mortizs and Coke. Enough early retirements and that'll add 5 kilos easy.

#3 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:30

The 605kg is the regulatory minimum - the team would have factored in fluid loss over the course of a GP, and added a small buffer - all of which can sum up to about 5kg worth of extra weight to guarantee that the car comes in over the minimum.

#4 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:31

Originally posted by rdebourbon
The 605kg is the regulatory minimum - the team would have factored in fluid loss over the course of a GP, and added a small buffer - all of which can sum up to about 5kg worth of extra weight to guarantee that the car comes in over the minimum.


That's irrelevant as Button's team would have done the same. I'm well aware the 605kg is a minimum.

#5 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,030 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:32

Button might have also been cruising and saving fuel befind Trulli. His fastest lap and the gap he pulled so easy in free air do make it seem so.

#6 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:33

Originally posted by Atreiu
Button might have also been cruising and saving fuel befind Trulli. His fastest lap and the gap he pulled so easy in free air do make it seem so.


How could Button have been cruising if he was in front of Kimi? That means he was going faster than Kimi. You dont save fuel by going faster.

#7 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,745 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:33

Maybe kimi came in early because Ferrari thought it was gonna rain that lap????

#8 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:35

Originally posted by Mika Mika
Maybe kimi came in early because Ferrari thought it was gonna rain that lap????


That is a possibility, but some people are saying Kimi had to come in that lap because he was low on fuel and that is why he ended up with the wets on so early.

#9 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,745 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:35

Originally posted by Madras


How could Button have been cruising if he was in front of Kimi? That means he was going faster than Kimi. You dont save fuel by going faster.


Well the Brawn Crusing could be faster than the Ferrari Flat out!!!! Also th eMerc could be a lot more efficient than the Ferrari Engine.

#10 Hyatt

Hyatt
  • Member

  • 1,137 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:36

maybe one engine is more efficient than the other ,,,

#11 J2NH

J2NH
  • Member

  • 1,381 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:37

I think they totally missed on the rain. They must have felt it was starting when they brought him in and wanted to take advantage of having the car on full wets when the rest of the pack had to slow. They knew they did not have a fast enough car to win and hoped the gamble would shoot them up to the front. Rain held off, Kimi got hosed.

#12 Urawa

Urawa
  • Member

  • 1,135 posts
  • Joined: August 08

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:38

I think Button just saved fuel while driving behind Trulli in the first stint. Button could have gone a lot faster as we have seen later.

#13 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:38

Originally posted by Hyatt
maybe one engine is more efficient than the other ,,,


It's a big difference, I doubt it.

#14 Gilles4Ever

Gilles4Ever
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 20,602 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:38

It was reported that both Kimi and Massa said it started raining so they brought kimi in

#15 Mika Mika

Mika Mika
  • Member

  • 6,745 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:39

Originally posted by Urawa
I think Button just saved fuel while driving behind Trulli in the first stint. Button could have gone a lot faster as we have seen later.


Thats true - when truli came in Button was faster than the Millenium Falcon!!!

#16 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,030 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:41

Originally posted by Madras


How could Button have been cruising if he was in front of Kimi? That means he was going faster than Kimi. You dont save fuel by going faster.


Did you see how he was held behind Trulli and then pulled away with the pit stops? That was 'cruising' and there's nothing to say a Mercedes engine can't be less thirsty than a Ferrari.

#17 Juan Kerr

Juan Kerr
  • Member

  • 2,669 posts
  • Joined: October 05

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:42

Originally posted by Madras


How could Button have been cruising if he was in front of Kimi? That means he was going faster than Kimi. You dont save fuel by going faster.

Errrrrr yes you do.
There's a few more types of energy involved than just kinetic. Do you think the cars transfer 100% of their energy resource to kinetic energy or something ? LOL

#18 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:43

Originally posted by Urawa
I think Button just saved fuel while driving behind Trulli in the first stint. Button could have gone a lot faster as we have seen later.


Such was/is the margin, and they knew they were running longer, it would make sense for them to turn down the wick, and "coast" until they were leading and could make full use of their package..

#19 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:45

Originally posted by Juan Kerr
Errrrrr yes you do.
There's a few more types of energy involved than just kinetic.


What are you on about???

Advertisement

#20 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:46

Originally posted by Madras
Kimi's car weighed 662.5kg after qualifying, Button's weighed 660.0kg, which theoretically gives Kimi one lap extra, but Kimi pitted one lap before Button. So if Kimi really was low on fuel and had to stop, it gives the impression that Kimi's Ferrari is 5kg heavier than the 605kg minimum without fuel.

I am sorry, but I don't quite understand this question. Is it a problem if Kimi's Ferrari is 5kg above the minimum 605kg weight, ie at 610kg?

Or are you saying Kimi's car is 600kg, therefore it violates the 605kg minimum weight rule?

-KB

#21 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:47

Originally posted by Atreiu


Did you see how he was held behind Trulli and then pulled away with the pit stops? That was 'cruising' and there's nothing to say a Mercedes engine can't be less thirsty than a Ferrari.


ok I can see that they could have turned the revs down a bit and saved a bit of fuel, however I do not believe the Merc engine is significantly more fuel efficient.

#22 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:48

Originally posted by Kelateboy

I am sorry, but I don't quite understand this question. Is it a problem if Kimi's Ferrari is 5kg above the minimum 605kg weight, ie at 610kg?

Or are you saying Kimi's car is 600kg, therefore it violates the 605kg minimum weight rule?

-KB


No it isnt a problem that it is 610kg, apart from the fact it would mean it is 5kg heavier than it needs to be.

#23 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:50

I can't honestly see that a team like Ferrari would consider running a car with KERS if they were unable to do so within 605kg.

It would appear that Kimi pitted a lap earlier, Why?
Don't know, but likely related to their throw of the dice by going on to full wets.

#24 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:52

Originally posted by Madras


No it isnt a problem that it is 610kg, apart from the fact it would mean it is 5kg heavier than it needs to be.

OK. I think the 2.5kg/lap formulae may not be that accurate after all. Kimi was stucked behind Alonso for the better part of the 1st stint, probably the dirty air or wake from Alonso's car could have affected Kimi's fuel consumption. No?

-KB

#25 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:54

Originally posted by Kelateboy

OK. I think the 2.5kg/lap formulae may not be that accurate after all. Kimi was stucked behind Alonso for the better part of the 1st stint, probably the dirty air or wake from Alonso's car could have affected Kimi's fuel consumption. No?

-KB


Well Button was stuck behind Trulli. I guess if Kimi was actually trying to get past for a number of laps whereas Button was just following it would affect fuel consumption a bit.

Perhaps with the Brawn being faster in the corners it means they dont lose so much speed braking so arent using fuel getting the speed back after the corners so much.

I dont think at race speed it's possible to save 2 laps of fuel though. Even one would be pushing it.

#26 rdebourbon

rdebourbon
  • Member

  • 1,353 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:56

Something else to consider, does KERS affect fuel consumption in any way?

#27 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 14:58

Originally posted by rdebourbon
Something else to consider, does KERS affect fuel consumption in any way?


No.

#28 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 7,734 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 05 April 2009 - 15:12

Originally posted by Kelateboy

OK. I think the 2.5kg/lap formulae may not be that accurate after all. Kimi was stucked behind Alonso for the better part of the 1st stint, probably the dirty air or wake from Alonso's car could have affected Kimi's fuel consumption. No?

-KB



Well yeah but in which way? Following a car you are driving through the hole the car in front has punched in the air - reduce, use of throttle and brakes depends on the guy in front an probably not in your interest - increase...

#29 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 05 April 2009 - 15:14

Originally posted by Oho



Well yeah but in which way? Following a car you are driving through the hole the car in front has punched in the air


Only if you're right behind, in the slipstream.

#30 Odvan

Odvan
  • Member

  • 2,074 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 05 April 2009 - 16:08

I think he just has 5 kg overweight because of KERS they need proper weight distribution. Same problem in BMW for Kubica - they need more ballast for him heaving KERS onboard.

Get rid of this KURSE, please!

#31 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 37,654 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 05 April 2009 - 17:49

Kimi forgot to have a shit beforehand.

#32 Ferrim

Ferrim
  • Member

  • 822 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 06 April 2009 - 00:26

If Ferrari really made Kimi to pit early, they are way more stupid than I previously thought.

#33 Flexa

Flexa
  • Member

  • 404 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 06 April 2009 - 00:32

It seems yes , also in Australia Kimi for example was heavier than Felipe but was going to stop in lap 14 while Massa even if he was lighter, was going to stop in lap 15.

#34 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 06 April 2009 - 00:55

Originally posted by Madras


How could Button have been cruising if he was in front of Kimi? That means he was going faster than Kimi. You dont save fuel by going faster.

Cruising is relative to the pace of the respective car. What is cruising for one car could be pushing to the limit for another car. That said, I am not ruling out the extra weight, either.

I have known Kimi himself is very good in saving fuel. Monza 2005 being an example.

It would also depend on individual car's fuel consumption.

Anyway, Rosberg 6.5 kg lighter than Kimi pitted 3 laps earlier. Vettel 15 kg lighter than Kimi pitted 5 laps earlier. Barrichello who was 4.5 kg heavier than Button pitted only one lap later (seems to indicate Button was crusing, considering how he went 1.5 s faster than Barrichello in that in-lap)

#35 Racer Joe

Racer Joe
  • Member

  • 2,881 posts
  • Joined: December 02

Posted 06 April 2009 - 00:57

Originally posted by Madras


How could Button have been cruising if he was in front of Kimi? That means he was going faster than Kimi. You dont save fuel by going faster.


Most of the lap time difference between Button and Raikkonen is due to difference in speed in the corners, rather than the straights (let's leave KERS aside). Just because a Brawn is going faster than a Ferrari doesn't mean it can't be using less fuel because its advantage comes from higher corner speed If Jenson could carry more speed into each corner he wouldn't necessarily be using more fuel, just wasting less.

#36 paulm

paulm
  • Member

  • 177 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 06 April 2009 - 01:01

Originally posted by Madras
How could Button have been cruising if he was in front of Kimi? That means he was going faster than Kimi. You dont save fuel by going faster.


You can "go faster" by slowing down less, slowing down less doesn't cost fuel.