- 9,554
- Vermont
- catamount39
*starts crying profusely*No I mixed up the ELMS winner with the WEC winner... Sorry 'bout that
*starts crying profusely*No I mixed up the ELMS winner with the WEC winner... Sorry 'bout that
I hate myself for feeling some sort of satisfaction because of this...
The old skid plate worn down too much bit, how F1 or you WEC. I didn't even realize it was a strict rule or a rule until this happened.
That's a thing?That's the second new one for me, behind "Driving Unnecessarily Slowly In The Pit Entry"
That's a thing?
Nico Hülkenberg got pinged for it in the Chinese Grand Prix. Force India had him slow down on entry do that they could service Sergio Pérez without double-stacking Hülkenberg. That in and of itself isn't a problem; Hülkenberg took a penalty because the stewards felt that he disadvantaged others by slowing down. A queue formed behind him and he was going so slowly that Sebastian Vettel was able to accelerate past him (and another driver; I can't remember who) and still slow down for the speed limiter. It's an obscure rule, to be sure, but undoubtedly there to stop teams using one driver to impede another and manipulate the result of the race.That's a thing?
The skid plate rule is there to stop teams from running a ridiculously low ride height. It dates back to the days of active suspension, when teams could electronically control the ride height. The skid plate was introduced when active suspension was banned as a means of moderating it; if the ride height is too low, the skid plate wears down. There is some tolerance for normal wear and tear - say, going over a high kerb - but there comes a point where the skid plate is so worn out that the only way to have done it is to have run outside the regulations.That's the second new one for me,
These days, excess wear of a skid plate is usually a by-product of an aggressive set-up, or a flawed set-up.I know why the skid plate/block rule is there, but I didn't think WEC had a rule to the same extent as F1 does in that regards. Oh well, too bad for Audi, I think they knew there was a risk of this which is why they didn't launch an appeal.
These days, excess wear of a skid plate is usually a by-product of an aggressive set-up, or a flawed set-up.
Was this the Audi that had a front tire rubbing on the top of the wheel arch?Audi have appealed, but the results stand as-is for now at least. The advantage gained from running the car too low is noticeable. The penalty would happen to any other competitor, so all is fair imo.
Was this the Audi that had a front tire rubbing on the top of the wheel arch?
Imagine if Porsche was the victim. Anyway, as an Audi fan, they shouldn't have been cheating with the car being low, just play by the rules.
The astroturf on the exits of Copse and Stowe have been removed, and from Friday practice at least, the cars were totally ignoring the track limits through Copse, so I can easily see that being one major source for floor removal, seeing as I found the scrape marks on the kerbs, which were a wooden plank colour...Plank damage was probably caused by the excessive amount of kerbing being taken. And if Porsche was "victim" would have made no difference. Rules are rules, you may take your blinkers off now.
Well they were trying to get an advantage, one that did violate the regulations by scrapping the plank my corner cutting.![]()
![]()
Setting a car ride height low is cheating?
![]()
![]()
Plank damage was probably caused by the excessive amount of kerbing being taken. And if Porsche was "victim" would have made no difference. Rules are rules, you may take your blinkers off now.
Well they were trying to get an advantage, one that did violate the regulations by scrapping the plank my corner cutting.
And, I am honored to take my blinkers off.
![]()
Well the :censored:ing plate was worn:*citation needed of proof of advantage*
*citation needed of deliberate ploy for cheating*
Where did you get the info from 2015? They're completely wrong. Right numbers: http://fiawec.alkamelsystems.com/Re...6/07_FastestLapByDriverAfter_Race_ByClass.PDFLap times were a lot faster this year compared to last year. LMP1 fastest lap in 2015 was a 1:47.412. In 2016 it was a 1:40.303. LMP2 fastest time in 2015 was 1:56.735. 2016 was 1:48.909. Impressive considering the LMP1 cars should be slower due to having their fuel per lap limit reduced by 7.5%. Conditions were pretty similar too - sunny and cold.
Where did you get the info from 2015? They're completely wrong. Right numbers: http://fiawec.alkamelsystems.com/Results/05_2015/01_SILVERSTONE/78_FIA WEC/201504121230_Race/Hour 6/07_FastestLapByDriverAfter_Race_ByClass.PDF