
Where's Atlas on this?


Posted 02 September 2004 - 16:46
Advertisement
Posted 02 September 2004 - 16:59
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:08
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:13
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:14
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:18
Originally posted by arcwulf7
The man leads a charmed life. He went into the armco on a test a few years ago at 300k.. walked away. Good conditioning, excellent technology.. still going from 300k to zero in a few milliseconds sends all the organs and bones crashing into each other inside the human body, it doesn't get any softer as you get older. Wonder if this has Michael thinking just how long he wants to tempt the hands of fate.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:19
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:28
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:32
I totally agreeOriginally posted by Scudetto
ANYONE who wishes for, cheers for, applauds for, relishes in, or otherwises derives enjoyment from a driver's shunt is a dispicable lowlife of immeasureable proportions.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:33
Originally posted by F1Johnny
He broke his neck at Benetton?
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:37
Originally posted by PhilKerr
Yes I definitely remember that he broke a vertebrae in his neck and continued racing despite the fact that he knew another shunt could kill or paralyse him, I believe he did it in testing
Maybe someone on here can confirm this is the case
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:37
Originally posted by PhilKerr
Yes I definitely remember that he broke a vertebrae in his neck and continued racing despite the fact that he knew another shunt could kill or paralyse him, I believe he did it in testing
Maybe someone on here can confirm this is the case
Posted 02 September 2004 - 17:49
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:08
That's my understanding, based on comments I recall being made prior to Belgium...Originally posted by ERD1
I wonder if this was with the 'new' Bridgestones, as used in Hungary and sidelined for Spa - because of the need for more high speed circuit testing.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:12
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:34
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:41
I think Michelin responded well with better performance tyres at Spa that last onl if you stay well on track like Kimi did. Maybe Bstones follow the same to increase tyre performance.Originally posted by HBoss
So these things don't happen to Michelin only.
I'm glad MS' ok.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:46
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:47
Advertisement
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:49
Posted 02 September 2004 - 18:52
Posted 02 September 2004 - 19:00
Originally posted by karlth
Just read in Autosport that Bridgestone felt "ashamed" by their performance at Spa and will not let it happen again.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 19:08
Posted 02 September 2004 - 19:21
Originally posted by PhilKerr
broken leg at Ferrari in 1999
broken neck at Benetton
yeah very charmed life![]()
as for that other weirdo at the start of the thread, I would probably be banned if I called you what I wanted to call you![]()
Posted 02 September 2004 - 19:22
Posted 02 September 2004 - 19:28
Originally posted by tmccandless
ITV has a short story on it but not much more detail than already given. Very odd for a Bridgestone, we haven't seen that all year really.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 19:28
Originally posted by DaleCooper
I knew it was the bloody tires. Can we please have an end to the tyre war?
Cooper
Posted 02 September 2004 - 20:05
Michael claims it was the numerous Safety Car periods which gave the race to Kimi, because his............. tires ..............took too long to warm up allowing those who passed him to do so under acceleration, though he admits Montoya's pass took him by surprise.Originally posted by DaleCooper
I knew it was the bloody tires. Can we please have an end to the tyre war?
Posted 02 September 2004 - 20:06
Posted 02 September 2004 - 20:12
Originally posted by ERD1
...I do think that both tire manufacturers might be toying with fragility in order to extract the last ounce of performance. This is not allowed with the car (ie min weight, crash testing etc) so why is it allowed with the tyre?
I can envision an FIA run tire test rig that takes the tyre to say 120% max rotational speed and very high and low downforces and rolls the equivalent of kerb discontinuites into it that must be successfully completed before any different tire construction can be used in anger.
(The test rig would be 'datumed' by, for instance, the Michelin tyres used at Spa failing on it.)
This should not await a fatal accident. Apart from this time with Michael, many, including Jenson, were very lucky at Spa. The writing is on the wall.
Right away the FIA could mandate a return to the latest race-proven tire construction of each manufacturer until such time as a suitable test procedure can be implemented.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 20:24
Posted 02 September 2004 - 21:01
Posted 02 September 2004 - 21:07
Posted 02 September 2004 - 21:10
Posted 02 September 2004 - 21:15
Originally posted by DaleCooper
My theory is that Ferrrai should have been 1 sec faster than anyone at SPA. Michael is great there and the ferrari suits the track. SO why were they all of a sudden being swallowed up by all the Michelin runners? SHould have been a cakewalk.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 21:17
Posted 02 September 2004 - 21:27
Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Michael WAS quick later in the day. His pace wasn't that bad, but the starts on cold tyres saw him past by numerous drivers. Chances are he simply had a car more set up for wet than Kimi and co, people have posted pics of a rather large back wing on the Ferrari. Dry qualifying, dry race, everything being equal I believe Ferrari would have won it comfortably.
Glad Michael's OK, car looked pretty banged up.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 21:34
Originally posted by eoin
Its shunts like these that could convince him to call it a day. He has nothing to prove, and everything to lose.
Posted 02 September 2004 - 22:12
Originally posted by CONOSUR
Where's Atlas on this?![]()
Advertisement
Posted 02 September 2004 - 22:16
Posted 02 September 2004 - 22:30
Posted 03 September 2004 - 03:00
Posted 03 September 2004 - 03:09
Originally posted by Keelan
Maybe Bira is on vacation?
Posted 03 September 2004 - 03:19
Posted 03 September 2004 - 05:44
Originally posted by karlth
Just read in Autosport that Bridgestone felt "ashamed" by their performance at Spa and will not let it happen again.
Posted 03 September 2004 - 06:08
Originally posted by Ricardo F1
Michael WAS quick later in the day. His pace wasn't that bad, but the starts on cold tyres saw him past by numerous drivers. Chances are he simply had a car more set up for wet than Kimi and co, people have posted pics of a rather large back wing on the Ferrari. Dry qualifying, dry race, everything being equal I believe Ferrari would have won it comfortably.
Glad Michael's OK, car looked pretty banged up.
Ross Brawn: "Given the conditions, the fact we were still fighting for pole is a good result. I don't think being second on the grid tomorrow is such a problem as a racing line will not have formed on the track by the time the race starts. We have a good dry set-up and our indications are that we will have a dry race tomorrow. It's a shame Rubens had a little problem at the end of his lap, as it means he now has more work to do. In fact, we advised Michael to be cautious after seeing Raikkonen and Rubens nearly come off the track and so he rightly took it quite easy in the last sector. I think we will be in a strong position tomorrow as we did not compromise today and ran with a dry set-up."
David Coulthard - 4th: "I was a little bit worried at the start of my lap as it began to rain. However, the intermediates we chose to use shortly before my run gave us a good qualifying time, especially as this was my first lap on these tyres. The car has been set up for the race with dry weather in mind as is predicted, so we will have to wait and see tomorrow, but I feel we will have a strong race."
Kimi Raikkonen - 10th: "Unfortunately it started raining heavily during my run. I made a mistake in the last chicane, which cost me some time. However, from our performance yesterday in the dry I think we should be looking OK in the race when the weather hopefully will be dry again. The overall performance of my car has been good from the start of the weekend, so I am looking forward to tomorrow even though I am starting from tenth position."
Posted 03 September 2004 - 06:16
Originally posted by HSJ
That's odd. If you followed Ferrari and Sauber at Spa it was pretty clear that Bstone was the better tyre (much less drop off after first two laps than Michelin, that's why). This showed particularly well on Friday, but just because Ferrari and to lesser extent Sauber didn't make the most of their tyres on Sunday doesn't mean Bstone suddenly sucked. It is not the tyres' fault. (Just like McLaren in Hungary did not make most of their tyres.) Maybe they were embarrassed to not dominate as per usual. Oh wait a minute, maybe it was the performance they had after SC periods that made them ashamed?
Posted 03 September 2004 - 06:49
Originally posted by JForce
when deciding which tyres was better you need to look at the race as a whole. BS has spanked Michellin this season, but at Spa the Michellins were superior on the whole.
Posted 03 September 2004 - 12:35
Originally posted by Menace
Michelins were superior on the first few laps after safety-car and start, atleast thats according to MS.
Posted 03 September 2004 - 14:56