| Welcome to The Pit Lane. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Have Ferrai Beaten The Engine Freeze? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 9 2008, 08:44 AM (1,104 Views) | |
| Brave_Lee_Flea | May 10 2008, 10:15 AM Post #46 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Actually it is true ... McLaren overplayed their hand ... had they been more surreptitious they could probably have quietly used the information to improve their own car and nobody would ever have questioned anything. Although there was precedent set when Force India (or whoever they were back then) obtained blueprints of the STR in order to prove it was the same car as the Red Bull and they didn't get punished. Moral: if you're going to be sneaky - be sneaky. |
![]() |
|
| Norbert | May 10 2008, 07:30 PM Post #47 |
![]() ![]()
|
I assume going to Prontaprint with 780 pages of documents isn't sneaky then?
|
![]() |
|
| timmadigan | May 10 2008, 08:12 PM Post #48 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not a fan of this freeze by any means. I feel it's stupid and takes away from the spirit of racing. BUT -- if you're going to have it, you need to do exactly that... FREEZE the engines. Any changes must be made 1) off season, 2) be due to a reliability issue with design and 3) the change must be submitted to and approved by indenpendant engineers with the spec runs showing no noticiable improvement in performance - reviewable and publishable to all teams. |
![]() |
|
| Brave_Lee_Flea | May 10 2008, 11:06 PM Post #49 |
![]()
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
lol, clearly it is sneaky but alerting the world's attention by requesting clarification of Ferrari's floor was not exactly an object lesson in how to make sure one's sneakiness remains undetected! |
![]() |
|
| Steelstallions | May 11 2008, 06:38 AM Post #50 |
![]()
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Just shows what an advantage Ferrari had in 2007. Having the blue prints to the car were not enough for Mclaren or having Stepney giving a live feed on the cars set up for races etc etc. They were not satisfied at this advantage, so one race into the season they had to even report the parts where Ferrari pushed the rules like all teams do. Would be good to get hold of Mclarens blue prints for 2008 and 2009 and report all their grey areas to FIA................even when they know they are being scrutineered they still have three dodgy areas on the car that they negotiate to still use but not develop. It makes winning both WDC and WCC in 2007 a lot more satisfying. NB: regardless of the Mclaren points penalty Ferrari did score more points than Mclaren would have had at the end of the season so would have won it penalty or not. You could argue they did not appeal Hungary, but had they not cheated would they have scored as many points as they did anyway? |
![]() |
|
| Lex | May 11 2008, 07:34 AM Post #51 |
|
Driver
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I wonder if Colin Chapman's Lotus would have been allowed in 1967 had the FIA had F1's collective balls in their hands then as they do now! |
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | May 12 2008, 11:05 AM Post #52 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, MC entrusted it to his wife, which I guess wasn't such a smart move. We all know how bad women are at keeping secrets.
|
![]() |
|
| flood1 | May 13 2008, 02:48 AM Post #53 |
|
Chief Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think Ferrari's modifications must have been in areas critical to the engine's needs, but not dimensionally critical. What I mean by dimensionally critical is this; When one homolgates an engine, one blueprints an "as built" drawing of each and every part. One also catelogues the materials. If after use, the specific part differs from the original design by a significant dimension, it is considered a reliability issue. They did not think the material would "erode" at that pace. The material may need revision. Changing the material of the constructed part and not the dimensions, purpose, or design intent does not contravene the homologation rules. Ferrari had an issue with two things: hydraulic pressure to their seamless transmission and engine oil flow at high RPMs. Both of these systems had issues with regard to "off engine" systems. But, it required a change to fittings and orifaces that are part of the homologated systems. That required approval. These approval have been consented to all teams. But when the fastest team is given an exception, then the conspiracy theorists are out. I also must say the debate regarding the spirit of achievement as directed by The Complete Guitarist started an very interesting dialogue which I have really enjoyed reading. |
![]() |
|
| FlutterBy | May 13 2008, 09:47 AM Post #54 |
|
Refueller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It's certainly stupid, so much so that I find it difficult to believe it ever happened! Two reasons - why was this document set 'hard copy' and not DVD; and why use a public commercial printer, doesn't McLaren have photocopiers? Sorry, going OT there, but that one's bothered me for some time. |
![]() |
|
| willyshafter | May 13 2008, 10:01 AM Post #55 |
|
Engineer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Nothing wrong with a conspiracy thoery. Maybe was Stepeny mole with in Ferrari for Mclaren or vice versa with Mike Colughlen at Mclaren. |
![]() |
|
| John | May 13 2008, 10:02 AM Post #56 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Whether you believe it or not is immaterial as McLaren have owned up to it's existence... and as for using the local copier shop... never under estimate the stupidity of people
|
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | May 13 2008, 10:05 AM Post #57 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Shouldn't that be Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity |
![]() |
|
| FlutterBy | May 13 2008, 10:06 AM Post #58 |
|
Refueller
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
'owned up'... under duress...? |
![]() |
|
| John | May 13 2008, 10:11 AM Post #59 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
they owned up because they did it... now if you cannot bring yourself to awknowledge this fact that is a matter for you... it will not change the recorded history of those events.. Time to admit it and move on FB... Ron has... Mclaren have... |
![]() |
|
| AndyW76 | May 13 2008, 10:15 AM Post #60 |
|
Team Boss
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
As I recall McLaren never admitted to having the document but they did admit to having some solicited information. That is like me admitting to being english but then being accused of starting the hundred years war. Though it is probably true that Mike Coughlan had the document, that does not mean that the other mclaren staff knew about it, hence MC using public facilities to copy it. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Formula 1 · Next Topic » |






![]](http://z6.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







8:34 AM Jul 11