Ferrari Mailing List: Re: F1 SPOILER

[clyde (clyderomero]

Yea the engine blew up
But it wasn't alonzos fault

Clyde
Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless

-----Original Message-----
From: LS <lashdeep [at] yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 11:02:11 
To:clyde <clyderomero [at] mycingular.blackberry.net>,       Home <clyderomero 
[at] worldnet.att.net>
Cc:The FerrariList <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
Subject: Re: [Ferrari] F1 SPOILER

I watched the race and saw Renault's engine blow up.

What race did you watch?

LS

--- clyde <clyderomero [at] mycingular.blackberry.net> wrote:

> Where did you get that BS from LS?
> 
> Clyde
> Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LS <lashdeep [at] yahoo.com>
> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 08:54:09 
> To:clyde <clyderomero [at] worldnet.att.net>
> Cc:The FerrariList <ferrari [at] ferrarilist.com>
> Subject: Re: [Ferrari] F1 SPOILER
> 
> Renault's job as a competitor is to build a tool that can withstand any
> and every challenge that Alonso is presented with during a particular
> race. 
> 
> Not taking into account all possibilites (starting 10th instead of 5th)
> is
> not understanding your requirements.
> 
> "their
> > best guess and compromise"
> 
> Their best didn't cut it. Good luck to them next time...hopefully they
> will have it figured out.
> 
> LS
> 
> 
> --- Dennis Liu <BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net> wrote:
> 
> > Lashdeep wrote:
> > 
> > >The Renault engine should be able to endure any level of effort and
> > abuse,
> > despite any setback or penalty. It wasn't.
> > 
> > -------------
> > 
> > Now that's just plain silly.  :-)  
> > 
> > Racing equipment has a finite life, especially in F1.  Teams build
> > everything to extremely close tolerances, essentially following Colin
> > Chapman's dictum that the perfect racing car is the one that falls
> apart
> > after it crosses the finish line - if it lasts any longer, then it was
> > built
> > too well/strong/heavy.  Weight is the enemy, so engineers build things
> > to
> > last just long enough (and be safe enough too, of course).  
> > 
> > Want more power but displacement is limited, fuel type is limited,
> > aspiration is atmospheric?  Add more revs.  But that cuts into
> > reliability.
> > So you build the engine just long enough to last for qualifying, and
> you
> > swap it out for another one that lasts just long enough for the race. 
> > Wait,
> > there is a 2-race rule?  Ok, you build the engine just long enough to
> > last
> > for TWO races, including qualifying.  But if you have to abuse it, run
> > it to
> > the ragged edge, it may not last as long as you want.
> > 
> > Renault built its engine to a certain spec limit.  That spec limit was
> > their
> > best guess and compromise - it has to last 2 races, but must also
> > produce as
> > much horsepower as possible.  If it ABSOLUTELY must last two races,
> then
> > you
> > opt for lower rev limits and lose power.  If you grant your driver
> more
> > power for a goodly portion of a race, then you cut into whatever
> safety
> > margin you had built in, and run a much higher risk of blowing the
> thing
> > up.
> > 
> > Every team has the ability to build a completely bulletproof motor
> that
> > will
> > last two races.  Heck, last an entire season.  But it would be dead
> > last.
> > 
> > How fast do you want to go?  Well, how long do you want to dance on
> the
> > edge
> > of the knife?
> > 
> > Renault and Alonso had to dance on the edge longer because they had to
> > start
> > from 10th and push like hell to catch up to Schumacher.  That ate into
> > their
> > safety margin.  If they had started 5th, they would not have had to
> push
> > as
> > hard.  
> > 
> > Vty,
> > 
> > --Dennis
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: LS [mailto:lashdeep [at] yahoo.com] 
> > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:08 AM
> > To: BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net
> > Cc: The FerrariList
> > Subject: Re: [Ferrari] F1 SPOILER
> > 
> > Too much theorizing here guys...his motor blew.  It wasn't up to
> > Alonso's
> > effort and Renault needs to work on that if a championship is
> important.
> > 
> > Strategy (rev limits, cruise mode, qual mode) is pointless if your
> > equipment
> > isn't designed to entertain all of the possible strategic options when
> > necessary.
> > 
> > The Renault engine should be able to endure any level of effort and
> > abuse,
> > despite any setback or penalty. It wasn't.
> > 
> > I remember the same discussion with the tires at Indy a few years ago.
> > Michelin failed and all of the teams paid the price. Here Alonso is
> > paying
> > the price for an equipment failure. They need to step their game up
> > because
> > in racing, there are situations that present themselves that cannot be
> > planned for or strategized around.
> > 
> > LS
> > 
> > 
> > --- Dennis Liu <BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > Yeah, that's my point exactly, Lashdeep - it's too difficult to say,
> 
> > > which is why one shouldn't use the excuse, "it doesn't matter 'cause
> 
> > > his engine blew up anyway!".
> > > 
> > > Typically with race motors, if you cut rev usage by a few hundred 
> > > revs, you can DOUBLE the life of the motor.  A few laps at the 
> > > absolute limit of the motor can cause it to expire in a very short 
> > > time, while those same laps at 99% can cause the motor to last
> another
> > 
> > > race entirely.  If Alonso had been higher up on the race grid, and 
> > > managed to get himself behind Schumacher, he would not need to pass 
> > > him.  Remember, even if he finishes immediately behind Schumacher
> for 
> > > every race between Monza and Brazil, he still wins the championship!
>  
> > > Heck, even if he finished third or fourth behind Michael in 1st or 
> > > 2nd, it's not the end of the world -- much better than blowing up
> your
> > 
> > > engine trying to make it into the points!  Alonso had a great start 
> > > yesterday, and he's always really good on starts.  So he could have 
> > > just hit "cruise mode", and saved the engine - indeed, he wouldn't 
> > > even have to be right on Schumacher's bumper, he would only have to 
> > > keep challengers from passing him.
> > > 
> > > Vty,
> > > 
> > > --Dennis
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: LS [mailto:lashdeep [at] yahoo.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 9:16 AM
> > > To: BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net
> > > Cc: 'The FerrariList'
> > > Subject: RE: [Ferrari] F1 SPOILER
> > > 
> > > "Which would mean he
> > > wouldn't have been as hard on the engine, so it may not have blown
> up 
> > > - remember, drivers can and often do turn down the wick and go into 
> > > "cruise"
> > > mode.
> > > "
> > > 
> > > Understood, maybe it would lasted another 3 laps? It's difficult to 
> > > predict wouldn't you say? Maybe they went for too much in
> qualifying?
> > > 
> > > Either way, his motor expired.
> > > 
> > > LS
> > > 
> > > --- Dennis Liu <BigHeadDennis [at] earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Rick, one thing to keep in mind.  And please correct me if I'm 
> > > > wrong, since I'm sure you know much more about this than me.
> > > > 
> > > > The "blocking" decision was made by the local race stewards - the 
> > > > ITALIAN race stewards.  Is there a home team advantage?  Quite 
> 
=== message truncated ===


www.exhaust.tv

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com