F1 = Watersport

**Rollo** · 16th Sep 08, 00:46

Originally Posted by mstillhere

The rain this year is giving McLaren a big advantage. I think you said before that rain is an equalizer.

I'll re-iterate this:

Originally Posted by Rollo

Rain is the great equaliser because it to a very large degree negates the various capabilities of the cars.

I still hold this. In the rain it is the driver who has a bigger proportion of determining where the car finishes.

Senna in Monaco in 1984 - you can't honestly tell me that that Toleman was a world beater. It was Ayrton himself that drove the wheels of that car, not the Toleman being brilliant in the wet.
Likewise Senna's drive at Donington in 1993 was brilliant and again because of Senna being brilliant, not the McLaren which by all accounts if not for Senna was a dog turd on a stick.

Schumacher's drive in the European Grand Prix of 2000 had nothing to do with the Ferrari he was driving, at one stage he was 50 seconds ahead of Hakkinen who looked distant and out of his depth. The only reason why the margin at the end was only 13 seconds was because he dawdled across the line and drive near the pit wall for the team - the offcial race result belies the fact that Schumacher in the rain was pure magic (the Ferrari was irrelevant).

Originally Posted by mstillhere

I would agree with it however it seems that when it rains LH does not seem to equal to any other driver/team. So, it seems that so much rain is becoming a major player with a growing importance and concern amoung the different pilots and teams.

If Lewis isn't equal in the rain it's because of the relative ability of Lewis. Equally Vettel's win had very little to do with the Toro Rosso. Vettel's win although it had a little luck showed up the fact that Sebastian Vettel is hiding a storehouse of talent and if anything, the Toro Rosso is holding him back.

**mstillhere** · 16th Sep 08, 01:40

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

Where does this odd notion come from that Formula One cars are not designed to race in the rain???

Are the ride heights, wings and suspensions not adjustable? Does Bridgestone not offer two wet weather tire choices? Do the drivers not have the option to run heated visors? Are the electronic connections not mil spec and protected from water shorts?

This is the FIRST time I've ever seen a thread on an F1 board which complained about the weather offering one driver or team some sort of (unfair???) advantage. Talk about reaching...

So, you are buiyng a brand new sports car (Camaro, Mustang, Corvette, FERRARI, Bugatti, whatever) and befere buying it, you think: "Hum,,,I wonder how this car handles in the rain. Can't wait to test it in the rain." What I am trying to say is: Formula 1 cars are NOT designed/engineered to be racing in the rain. I would hope we can agree on that. That's not what they are build for. They could be "adapted" to be racing in the rain, but that's not their main purpose.) Maybe from now on it would be, since Ferrari is suffering so much. And what I also am saying is that too many rainy GP's could crown champion a driver who otherwise would not have won if there would have been less wet GPs.

**ShiftingGears** · 16th Sep 08, 02:15

Originally Posted by mstillhere

So, you are buiyng a brand new sports car (Camaro, Mustang, Corvette, FERRARI, Bugatti, whatever) and befere buying it, you think: "Hum,,,I wonder how this car handles in the rain. Can't wait to test it in the rain." What I am trying to say is: Formula 1 cars are NOT designed/engineered to be racing in the rain.

Formula One cars are designed to be the fastest - some cars have more mechanical grip than others, which contributes to their better performance in the wet.

Interchangable conditions have always been a part of grand prix racing. That means there may be more wet grands prix in some seasons than others - it doesn't matter.

I would hope we can agree on that. That's not what they are build for. They could be "adapted" to be racing in the rain, but that's not their main purpose.) Maybe from now on it would be, since Ferrari is suffering so much.

They are adapted - they can set the car up to a wet setup and put wet tyres on.

Ferrari's problem is that the car is at a disadvantage, moreso than McLaren, in cold and wet conditions.

And what I also am saying is that too many rainy GP's could crown champion a driver who otherwise would not have won if there would have been less wet GPs.

So what?

If a driver/team adapts to the conditions presented to them better than any other driver/team then they deserve to win.

**mstillhere** · 16th Sep 08, 03:32

Originally Posted by theugsquirrel

Formula One cars are designed to be the fastest - some cars have more mechanical grip than others, which contributes to their better performance in the wet.

Interchangable conditions have always been a part of grand prix racing. That means there may be more wet grands prix in some seasons than others - it doesn't matter.

They are adapted - they can set the car up to a wet setup and put wet tyres on.

Ferrari's problem is that the car is at a disadvantage, moreso than McLaren, in cold and wet conditions.

So what?

If a driver/team adapts to the conditions presented to them better than any other driver/team then they deserve to win.

I dont know. I guess I am too used to see a F1 championship with one or maybe two wet races. Since this year is not exactely th same thing I feel that the winner is not the best driver but the luckyest driver. Because what makes people like these kind of races is that they umpredictable and might not see McLAren always win in the rain. After all, the rainy China GP last year was not an exactely good one for McLaren. I'll bet you next year the fin will disappear and we will see a sail instead placed rigth behind the driver's head. It might add stability in the wet

**ioan** · 16th Sep 08, 08:47

Originally Posted by mstillhere

So, you are buiyng a brand new sports car (Camaro, Mustang, Corvette, FERRARI, Bugatti, whatever) and befere buying it, you think: "Hum,,,I wonder how this car handles in the rain. Can't wait to test it in the rain." What I am trying to say is: Formula 1 cars are NOT designed/engineered to be racing in the rain. I would hope we can agree on that. That's not what they are build for. They could be "adapted" to be racing in the rain, but that's not their main purpose.) Maybe from now on it would be, since Ferrari is suffering so much. And what I also am saying is that too many rainy GP's could crown champion a driver who otherwise would not have won if there would have been less wet GPs.

You're right mate!

They design the cars to have the best behavior in dry conditions, simply because every year 80 - 90% of the races are run in dry conditions!

**Jag_Warrior** · 17th Sep 08, 02:14

Originally Posted by ioan

You're right mate!

They design the cars to have the best behavior in dry conditions, simply because every year 80 - 90% of the races are run in dry conditions!

Other than boats, all surface based vehicles display the best behavior, in regard to speed and directional changes, in dry conditions... even snowmobiles. How exactly would one design a car which displayed better handling characteristics on a wet track than on a dry track? Simple physics...

Anyway, the performance parameters within which F1, Champ Cars and Le Mans cars are built include the capability to race in wet conditions. Unless God tips off certain teams or drivers, and not others, that it is going to rain during a given number of races in a particular season, I don't quite understand what this thread is even about. Ferrari has more than adequate engineering resources to adapt to the conditions that every other team faces during a race. Kimi is the highest paid driver in F1 and this isn't Felipe's first rodeo. So all I can do is play my violin for them:

**Jag_Warrior** · 17th Sep 08, 02:31

Originally Posted by mstillhere

So, you are buiyng a brand new sports car (Camaro, Mustang, Corvette, FERRARI, Bugatti, whatever) and befere buying it, you think: "Hum,,,I wonder how this car handles in the rain. Can't wait to test it in the rain."

Whether a daily driver or weekend car, yeah, that would cross my mind.

The only car I wouldn't worry about in the wet is one that I wouldn't drive in the wet: a vintage car. So unless it's a Series II E-type, it better be able to take a mountain road in the rain.

**ShiftingGears** · 17th Sep 08, 13:39

I bet theres going to be rain in at least one of the four remaining grands prix.

**ioan** · 17th Sep 08, 16:52

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

So unless it's a Series II E-type, it better be able to take a mountain road in the rain.

What if it's a 250 LM? Or a 250 MM?

**Jag_Warrior** · 20th Sep 08, 21:18

Originally Posted by ioan

What if it's a 250 LM? Or a 250 MM?

Well, if I ever get to the point where I have to choose which to drive, my Series II or an LM or MM... I'll let Ivanka Trump decide before we start our date.

**ioan** · 21st Sep 08, 13:23

Originally Posted by Jag_Warrior

Well, if I ever get to the point where I have to choose which to drive, my Series II or an LM or MM... I'll let Ivanka Trump decide before we start our date.

Yeah, I think you would need it!