FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[racechick]

Usually fairly cool in Shangai, something that only increases hopes seeing another good Raikkonen performance here. Podium will do just fine! The championship is long!

I've got people staying with me from Shanghai at the moment, it was 30 C when they left China! Bit of a shock for them is the UK weather at the moment. Of course it could all change in three weeks.

hate to tell you this bit it won't be 30c here in 3 weeks.

Nope, though I've heard we have a heat wave coming . I was meaning it may change in Shanghai and cool from 30C

[LewEngBridewell]

This, of course, is the scene of Nico Rosberg's first win last season. Can Mercedes do it again?

[SingaporeSling]

This, of course, is the scene of Nico Rosberg's first win last season. Can Mercedes do it again?

I wouldn't rule it out, going to bet on that if the betting odds are even close as good as they've been recently. I think RB is not as good or at least not as dominant as the number show. Ferrari too might still come and show more of it's speed. and Lotus of course. McLaren, I think not yet, maybe later.

[Hammer278]

Mercedes surprisingly keeping up with Redbull in the Msian GP...I was shocked to be honest. But let's say they had the correct amount of fuel, would Lewis manage to get past Vettel? I don't think so, since he'd be running heavier than he was. Still, encouraging stuff and they were clearly 2nd best in Msia in terms of race pace.

Shanghai is similar, but I'd bet on a Redbull winning...if Mark is able to keep the fire in his belly I won't be surprised to see him take the win. Lewis for another podium would do fine.

[andrew]

This, of course, is the scene of Nico Rosberg's first win last season. Can Mercedes do it again?

It'll depend if Alonso retires form this race or not. Plus I expect Lotus to be at or close to the front if it isn't too hot.

[spankyham]

If the article below is accurate, then it absolutely sucks! We have been through 3 seasons of the FiA refusing to do anything about the obvious and visible flexing/moving nose and front wing on the Red Bull. The defense generally put forward was that the car didn't fail any test. If the standard is - if you don't fail a test then your car is ok, then stick to it. Don't favor Red Bull with that interpretation and set a completely different standard for all other teams.

This inconsistency absolutely stinks IMO.

as translated by Bing wrote:">The Lotus needs to remove the fairings from suspensions

The FIA has asked the team to Enstone to remove the rubber that is considered an aerodynamic element mobile



The Lotus is one of the most observed one of the Circus: the E21 is the logical evolution of the car who last year was ranked fourth in the world. Kimi Raikkonen's success in Australia in 2013 debut race has certainly heightened the curiosity for a team that, despite having a budget that is about half that of the top team, manages to stay in the fight at the Summit.

CHALLENGED THE SUSPENSION FAIRINGS

The team of Enstone, however, is under the watchful eye of the FIA stewards: Besides being probably one of the three teams that the coaches have asked to change the splitter and the Tray to avoid flexing measured at Sepang, was also invited to modify the fairings of the front suspension arms, as has also been reported from BlogF1.

THE RUBBER AERODYNAMIC ELEMENT MOBILE?

As you can see in picture 1 Tech, Effe front suspension of the E21 has a characteristic distinguente from each other: in the area of connection to shell each arm, excluding the strut of the pushrod, you carinate by a second "skin" made of rubber that closes every gap. For the technicians of the FIA that solution is not legal because it is considered a mobile moving area, which maintains the cleanest streams in the area of the attack of the suspension and therefore may affect aerodynamics.

CHANGES FOR CHINA

James Allison, therefore, must ensure that its technicians are called to change the car in time for China, where the E21 must present lack of contested fairings. 'M curious about the fact that the Lotus last year had very similar solutions adopted and nobody had anything to say. Is the most eloquent sign that the team of Enstone scares someone for which controls are more careful ...

[RyRy]

Dyslexic tendencies, I keep reading UBS as USB -_--

[racechick]

I'm getting a bit bad with this betting lark! just put £6 on Lewis to win the Chinese at 8 to 1. £2 on Rosberg to win at 12 to 1 and £1 each way on Rosberg. that won't break the bank though will it.

[al4x]

Ugh, great, as said I think once you pass a test that should be it. Legal.

[myownalias]

Dyslexic tendencies, I keep reading UBS as USB -_--

Now there is an idea, an entire race run on a USB stick, The USB Grand Prix of Best Buy (PC World for UK members)...

[scotty]

So if i understand this right, what is being banned is essentially a couple of rubber seals joining the suspension arms to the bodywork. And that is considered movable aero to such a substantial effect that it must be banned? That's quite an extreme position, and i can't really see how it's even such a massive performance differentiator regardless...

[RyRy]

Dyslexic tendencies, I keep reading UBS as USB -_--

Now there is an idea, an entire race run on a USB stick, The USB Grand Prix of Best Buy (PC World for UK members)...

lol, that's quite an idea! xD

So if i understand this right, what is being banned is essentially a couple of rubber seals joining the suspension arms to the bodywork. And that is considered movable aero to such a substantial effect that it must be banned? That's quite an extreme position, and i can't really see how it's even such a massive performance differentiator regardless...

That's how I understood it too, but if you think about it the rubber seals the hole providing a more streamlined car...

[spankyham]

So if i understand this right, what is being banned is essentially a couple of rubber seals joining the suspension arms to the bodywork. And that is considered movable aero to such a substantial effect that it must be banned? That's quite an extreme position, and i can't really see how it's even such a massive performance differentiator regardless...

What is so galling about this is the absolute inconsistency of the FiA. In the case of Red Bull, we have a nose and front wing that clearly flex and move and clearly this is for aero advantage. The FiA responds by stating the car doesn't fail a test and so it is legal. The FiA announce they will increase the loads applied in testing but they never dream of simply banning either.

In this case with Lotus, there is far less movement and less benefit to be gained. It is also clear that the Lotus passes all tests. Yet, the FiA comes out and bans their innovation. This is not an argument about whether or not the flexing/moving is legal, it is about how the FiA react. Clearly inconsistent and, yet again we can see which team is benefiting while Lotus lose. This just adds to the list of similar decisions over the recent years.

[What's Burning?]

In the aero world, every little bit help, and who knows the ripple effect that smoothing the air there can have on the rest of the car. So I don't disagree that you could argue a vague interpretation of the rules of it illegal. I do agree the lack enforcement by the FIA on certain obvious violations that somehow manage to pass a test is laughable.

Kinda remind me of the Olympic downhill skiers of a few winters ago that were using the aero devices to smooth the boots and seams between the boots at the calf.

Is there still evidence of observable wing/nose movement by some teams this year?

[1Lemon]

So if i understand this right, what is being banned is essentially a couple of rubber seals joining the suspension arms to the bodywork. And that is considered movable aero to such a substantial effect that it must be banned? That's quite an extreme position, and i can't really see how it's even such a massive performance differentiator regardless...

What is so galling about this is the absolute inconsistency of the FiA. In the case of Red Bull, we have a nose and front wing that clearly flex and move and clearly this is for aero advantage. The FiA responds by stating the car doesn't fail a test and so it is legal. The FiA announce they will increase the loads applied in testing but they never dream of simply banning either.

In this case with Lotus, there is far less movement and less benefit to be gained. It is also clear that the Lotus passes all tests. Yet, the FiA comes out and bans their innovation. This is not an argument about whether or not the flexing/moving is legal, it is about how the FiA react. Clearly inconsistent and, yet again we can see which team is benefiting while Lotus lose. This just adds to the list of similar decisions over the recent years.

Are you suggesting that the FiA are falling on the side of Ferrari? Unthinkable!